| Message ID | 1409759373-22696-2-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 3 September 2014 17:49, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> wrote: > Also adds a class type PM_QOS_SUM that aggregates the values by summing them. > > It can be used by memory controllers to calculate the optimum clock frequency > based on the bandwidth needs of the different memory clients. > > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> Hi Rafael, will you take this one for 3.18? Thanks, Tomeu > --- > > v3: * Changed units to be megabits per second > --- > Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt | 4 +++- > include/linux/pm_qos.h | 5 ++++- > kernel/power/qos.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt b/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt > index a5da5c7..129f7c0 100644 > --- a/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt > +++ b/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt > @@ -5,7 +5,8 @@ performance expectations by drivers, subsystems and user space applications on > one of the parameters. > > Two different PM QoS frameworks are available: > -1. PM QoS classes for cpu_dma_latency, network_latency, network_throughput. > +1. PM QoS classes for cpu_dma_latency, network_latency, network_throughput, > +memory_bandwidth. > 2. the per-device PM QoS framework provides the API to manage the per-device latency > constraints and PM QoS flags. > > @@ -13,6 +14,7 @@ Each parameters have defined units: > * latency: usec > * timeout: usec > * throughput: kbs (kilo bit / sec) > + * memory bandwidth: mbs (mega bit / sec) > > > 1. PM QoS framework > diff --git a/include/linux/pm_qos.h b/include/linux/pm_qos.h > index 9ab4bf7..636e828 100644 > --- a/include/linux/pm_qos.h > +++ b/include/linux/pm_qos.h > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ enum { > PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY, > PM_QOS_NETWORK_LATENCY, > PM_QOS_NETWORK_THROUGHPUT, > + PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH, > > /* insert new class ID */ > PM_QOS_NUM_CLASSES, > @@ -32,6 +33,7 @@ enum pm_qos_flags_status { > #define PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LAT_DEFAULT_VALUE (2000 * USEC_PER_SEC) > #define PM_QOS_NETWORK_LAT_DEFAULT_VALUE (2000 * USEC_PER_SEC) > #define PM_QOS_NETWORK_THROUGHPUT_DEFAULT_VALUE 0 > +#define PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH_DEFAULT_VALUE 0 > #define PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_DEFAULT_VALUE 0 > #define PM_QOS_LATENCY_TOLERANCE_DEFAULT_VALUE 0 > #define PM_QOS_LATENCY_TOLERANCE_NO_CONSTRAINT (-1) > @@ -69,7 +71,8 @@ struct dev_pm_qos_request { > enum pm_qos_type { > PM_QOS_UNITIALIZED, > PM_QOS_MAX, /* return the largest value */ > - PM_QOS_MIN /* return the smallest value */ > + PM_QOS_MIN, /* return the smallest value */ > + PM_QOS_SUM /* return the sum */ > }; > > /* > diff --git a/kernel/power/qos.c b/kernel/power/qos.c > index 884b770..5f4c006 100644 > --- a/kernel/power/qos.c > +++ b/kernel/power/qos.c > @@ -105,11 +105,27 @@ static struct pm_qos_object network_throughput_pm_qos = { > }; > > > +static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(memory_bandwidth_notifier); > +static struct pm_qos_constraints memory_bw_constraints = { > + .list = PLIST_HEAD_INIT(memory_bw_constraints.list), > + .target_value = PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH_DEFAULT_VALUE, > + .default_value = PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH_DEFAULT_VALUE, > + .no_constraint_value = PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH_DEFAULT_VALUE, > + .type = PM_QOS_SUM, > + .notifiers = &memory_bandwidth_notifier, > +}; > +static struct pm_qos_object memory_bandwidth_pm_qos = { > + .constraints = &memory_bw_constraints, > + .name = "memory_bandwidth", > +}; > + > + > static struct pm_qos_object *pm_qos_array[] = { > &null_pm_qos, > &cpu_dma_pm_qos, > &network_lat_pm_qos, > - &network_throughput_pm_qos > + &network_throughput_pm_qos, > + &memory_bandwidth_pm_qos, > }; > > static ssize_t pm_qos_power_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf, > @@ -130,6 +146,9 @@ static const struct file_operations pm_qos_power_fops = { > /* unlocked internal variant */ > static inline int pm_qos_get_value(struct pm_qos_constraints *c) > { > + struct plist_node *node; > + int total_value = 0; > + > if (plist_head_empty(&c->list)) > return c->no_constraint_value; > > @@ -140,6 +159,12 @@ static inline int pm_qos_get_value(struct pm_qos_constraints *c) > case PM_QOS_MAX: > return plist_last(&c->list)->prio; > > + case PM_QOS_SUM: > + plist_for_each(node, &c->list) > + total_value += node->prio; > + > + return total_value; > + > default: > /* runtime check for not using enum */ > BUG(); > -- > 1.9.3 > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:11:25 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On 3 September 2014 17:49, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> wrote: > > Also adds a class type PM_QOS_SUM that aggregates the values by summing them. > > > > It can be used by memory controllers to calculate the optimum clock frequency > > based on the bandwidth needs of the different memory clients. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> > > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> > > Hi Rafael, > > will you take this one for 3.18? Quite likely, but I'm traveling now, so I'll do that after I'm back home in a few days. I'll write to you if there are any problems.
On 14 September 2014 19:06, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:11:25 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> On 3 September 2014 17:49, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> wrote: >> > Also adds a class type PM_QOS_SUM that aggregates the values by summing them. >> > >> > It can be used by memory controllers to calculate the optimum clock frequency >> > based on the bandwidth needs of the different memory clients. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> >> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> >> >> Hi Rafael, >> >> will you take this one for 3.18? > > Quite likely, but I'm traveling now, so I'll do that after I'm back home > in a few days. I'll write to you if there are any problems. Don't want to be annoying, but thought I might ping you just in case this fell through the cracks. Regards, Tomeu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 24 September 2014 15:32, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:42:13 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> On 14 September 2014 19:06, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: >> > On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:11:25 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> >> On 3 September 2014 17:49, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> wrote: >> >> > Also adds a class type PM_QOS_SUM that aggregates the values by summing them. >> >> > >> >> > It can be used by memory controllers to calculate the optimum clock frequency >> >> > based on the bandwidth needs of the different memory clients. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> >> >> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> >> >> >> >> Hi Rafael, >> >> >> >> will you take this one for 3.18? >> > >> > Quite likely, but I'm traveling now, so I'll do that after I'm back home >> > in a few days. I'll write to you if there are any problems. >> >> Don't want to be annoying, but thought I might ping you just in case >> this fell through the cracks. > > No, it didn't. > > I'm wondering about patch [2/2], though. I'm assuming that you'll push you > later through the Tegra DRM driver, right? Yes, that was Stephen's suggestion: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/25/439 Cheers, Tomeu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:42:13 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On 14 September 2014 19:06, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > > On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:11:25 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > >> On 3 September 2014 17:49, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> wrote: > >> > Also adds a class type PM_QOS_SUM that aggregates the values by summing them. > >> > > >> > It can be used by memory controllers to calculate the optimum clock frequency > >> > based on the bandwidth needs of the different memory clients. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> > >> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> > >> > >> Hi Rafael, > >> > >> will you take this one for 3.18? > > > > Quite likely, but I'm traveling now, so I'll do that after I'm back home > > in a few days. I'll write to you if there are any problems. > > Don't want to be annoying, but thought I might ping you just in case > this fell through the cracks. No, it didn't. I'm wondering about patch [2/2], though. I'm assuming that you'll push you later through the Tegra DRM driver, right?
On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 03:31:55 PM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On 24 September 2014 15:32, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > > On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:42:13 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > >> On 14 September 2014 19:06, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > >> > On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:11:25 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > >> >> On 3 September 2014 17:49, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> wrote: > >> >> > Also adds a class type PM_QOS_SUM that aggregates the values by summing them. > >> >> > > >> >> > It can be used by memory controllers to calculate the optimum clock frequency > >> >> > based on the bandwidth needs of the different memory clients. > >> >> > > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> > >> >> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> > >> >> > >> >> Hi Rafael, > >> >> > >> >> will you take this one for 3.18? > >> > > >> > Quite likely, but I'm traveling now, so I'll do that after I'm back home > >> > in a few days. I'll write to you if there are any problems. > >> > >> Don't want to be annoying, but thought I might ping you just in case > >> this fell through the cracks. > > > > No, it didn't. > > > > I'm wondering about patch [2/2], though. I'm assuming that you'll push you > > later through the Tegra DRM driver, right? > > Yes, that was Stephen's suggestion: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/25/439 OK, patch [1/2] queued up for 3.18, thanks!
On 26 September 2014 01:51, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 03:31:55 PM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> On 24 September 2014 15:32, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: >> > On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:42:13 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> >> On 14 September 2014 19:06, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: >> >> > On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:11:25 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> >> >> On 3 September 2014 17:49, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> wrote: >> >> >> > Also adds a class type PM_QOS_SUM that aggregates the values by summing them. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > It can be used by memory controllers to calculate the optimum clock frequency >> >> >> > based on the bandwidth needs of the different memory clients. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> >> >> >> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi Rafael, >> >> >> >> >> >> will you take this one for 3.18? >> >> > >> >> > Quite likely, but I'm traveling now, so I'll do that after I'm back home >> >> > in a few days. I'll write to you if there are any problems. >> >> >> >> Don't want to be annoying, but thought I might ping you just in case >> >> this fell through the cracks. >> > >> > No, it didn't. >> > >> > I'm wondering about patch [2/2], though. I'm assuming that you'll push you >> > later through the Tegra DRM driver, right? >> >> Yes, that was Stephen's suggestion: >> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/25/439 > > OK, patch [1/2] queued up for 3.18, thanks! Hi Rafael, I don't see this one in linux-next yet. Regards, Tomeu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Friday, October 10, 2014 08:59:22 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On 26 September 2014 01:51, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > > On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 03:31:55 PM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > >> On 24 September 2014 15:32, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > >> > On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:42:13 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > >> >> On 14 September 2014 19:06, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > >> >> > On Friday, September 12, 2014 11:11:25 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > >> >> >> On 3 September 2014 17:49, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > Also adds a class type PM_QOS_SUM that aggregates the values by summing them. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > It can be used by memory controllers to calculate the optimum clock frequency > >> >> >> > based on the bandwidth needs of the different memory clients. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> > >> >> >> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Hi Rafael, > >> >> >> > >> >> >> will you take this one for 3.18? > >> >> > > >> >> > Quite likely, but I'm traveling now, so I'll do that after I'm back home > >> >> > in a few days. I'll write to you if there are any problems. > >> >> > >> >> Don't want to be annoying, but thought I might ping you just in case > >> >> this fell through the cracks. > >> > > >> > No, it didn't. > >> > > >> > I'm wondering about patch [2/2], though. I'm assuming that you'll push you > >> > later through the Tegra DRM driver, right? > >> > >> Yes, that was Stephen's suggestion: > >> > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/25/439 > > > > OK, patch [1/2] queued up for 3.18, thanks! > > Hi Rafael, > > I don't see this one in linux-next yet. My bad, I skipped the pm-qos branch by mistake. Sorry about that. This week I'm attending conferences, but I'll push it to Linus next week if the merge windown is still open then. Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt b/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt index a5da5c7..129f7c0 100644 --- a/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt +++ b/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt @@ -5,7 +5,8 @@ performance expectations by drivers, subsystems and user space applications on one of the parameters. Two different PM QoS frameworks are available: -1. PM QoS classes for cpu_dma_latency, network_latency, network_throughput. +1. PM QoS classes for cpu_dma_latency, network_latency, network_throughput, +memory_bandwidth. 2. the per-device PM QoS framework provides the API to manage the per-device latency constraints and PM QoS flags. @@ -13,6 +14,7 @@ Each parameters have defined units: * latency: usec * timeout: usec * throughput: kbs (kilo bit / sec) + * memory bandwidth: mbs (mega bit / sec) 1. PM QoS framework diff --git a/include/linux/pm_qos.h b/include/linux/pm_qos.h index 9ab4bf7..636e828 100644 --- a/include/linux/pm_qos.h +++ b/include/linux/pm_qos.h @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ enum { PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY, PM_QOS_NETWORK_LATENCY, PM_QOS_NETWORK_THROUGHPUT, + PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH, /* insert new class ID */ PM_QOS_NUM_CLASSES, @@ -32,6 +33,7 @@ enum pm_qos_flags_status { #define PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LAT_DEFAULT_VALUE (2000 * USEC_PER_SEC) #define PM_QOS_NETWORK_LAT_DEFAULT_VALUE (2000 * USEC_PER_SEC) #define PM_QOS_NETWORK_THROUGHPUT_DEFAULT_VALUE 0 +#define PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH_DEFAULT_VALUE 0 #define PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_DEFAULT_VALUE 0 #define PM_QOS_LATENCY_TOLERANCE_DEFAULT_VALUE 0 #define PM_QOS_LATENCY_TOLERANCE_NO_CONSTRAINT (-1) @@ -69,7 +71,8 @@ struct dev_pm_qos_request { enum pm_qos_type { PM_QOS_UNITIALIZED, PM_QOS_MAX, /* return the largest value */ - PM_QOS_MIN /* return the smallest value */ + PM_QOS_MIN, /* return the smallest value */ + PM_QOS_SUM /* return the sum */ }; /* diff --git a/kernel/power/qos.c b/kernel/power/qos.c index 884b770..5f4c006 100644 --- a/kernel/power/qos.c +++ b/kernel/power/qos.c @@ -105,11 +105,27 @@ static struct pm_qos_object network_throughput_pm_qos = { }; +static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(memory_bandwidth_notifier); +static struct pm_qos_constraints memory_bw_constraints = { + .list = PLIST_HEAD_INIT(memory_bw_constraints.list), + .target_value = PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH_DEFAULT_VALUE, + .default_value = PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH_DEFAULT_VALUE, + .no_constraint_value = PM_QOS_MEMORY_BANDWIDTH_DEFAULT_VALUE, + .type = PM_QOS_SUM, + .notifiers = &memory_bandwidth_notifier, +}; +static struct pm_qos_object memory_bandwidth_pm_qos = { + .constraints = &memory_bw_constraints, + .name = "memory_bandwidth", +}; + + static struct pm_qos_object *pm_qos_array[] = { &null_pm_qos, &cpu_dma_pm_qos, &network_lat_pm_qos, - &network_throughput_pm_qos + &network_throughput_pm_qos, + &memory_bandwidth_pm_qos, }; static ssize_t pm_qos_power_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf, @@ -130,6 +146,9 @@ static const struct file_operations pm_qos_power_fops = { /* unlocked internal variant */ static inline int pm_qos_get_value(struct pm_qos_constraints *c) { + struct plist_node *node; + int total_value = 0; + if (plist_head_empty(&c->list)) return c->no_constraint_value; @@ -140,6 +159,12 @@ static inline int pm_qos_get_value(struct pm_qos_constraints *c) case PM_QOS_MAX: return plist_last(&c->list)->prio; + case PM_QOS_SUM: + plist_for_each(node, &c->list) + total_value += node->prio; + + return total_value; + default: /* runtime check for not using enum */ BUG();