| Message ID | 20200527095854.21714-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add support for devices in the Energy Model | expand |
Hi Rafael, On 5/27/20 10:58 AM, Lukasz Luba wrote: > Hi all, > > Background of this version: > This is the v8 of the patch set and is has smaller scope. I had to split > the series into two: EM changes and thermal changes due to devfreq > dependencies. The patches from v7 9-14 which change devfreq cooling are > going to be sent in separate patch series, just after this set get merged > into mainline. These patches related to EM got acks and hopefully can go > through linux-pm tree. The later thermal patches will go through thermal > tree. > > The idea and purpose of the Energy Model framework changes: > This patch set introduces support for devices in the Energy Model (EM) > framework. It will unify the power model for thermal subsystem. It will > make simpler to add support for new devices willing to use more > advanced features (like Intelligent Power Allocation). Now it should > require less knowledge and effort for driver developer to add e.g. > GPU driver with simple energy model. A more sophisticated energy model > in the thermal framework is also possible, driver needs to provide > a dedicated callback function. More information can be found in the > updated documentation file. > > First 7 patches are refactoring Energy Model framework to add support > of other devices that CPUs. They change: > - naming convention from 'capacity' to 'performance' state, > - API arguments adding device pointer and not rely only on cpumask, > - change naming when 'cpu' was used, now it's a 'device' > - internal structure to maintain registered devices > - update users to the new API > Patch 8 updates OPP framework helper function to be more generic, not > CPU specific. > > The patch set is based on linux-pm branch linux-next 813946019dfd. > Could you take the patch set via your linux-pm? Regards, Lukasz
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 5:01 PM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > > On 5/27/20 10:58 AM, Lukasz Luba wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Background of this version: > > This is the v8 of the patch set and is has smaller scope. I had to split > > the series into two: EM changes and thermal changes due to devfreq > > dependencies. The patches from v7 9-14 which change devfreq cooling are > > going to be sent in separate patch series, just after this set get merged > > into mainline. These patches related to EM got acks and hopefully can go > > through linux-pm tree. The later thermal patches will go through thermal > > tree. > > > > The idea and purpose of the Energy Model framework changes: > > This patch set introduces support for devices in the Energy Model (EM) > > framework. It will unify the power model for thermal subsystem. It will > > make simpler to add support for new devices willing to use more > > advanced features (like Intelligent Power Allocation). Now it should > > require less knowledge and effort for driver developer to add e.g. > > GPU driver with simple energy model. A more sophisticated energy model > > in the thermal framework is also possible, driver needs to provide > > a dedicated callback function. More information can be found in the > > updated documentation file. > > > > First 7 patches are refactoring Energy Model framework to add support > > of other devices that CPUs. They change: > > - naming convention from 'capacity' to 'performance' state, > > - API arguments adding device pointer and not rely only on cpumask, > > - change naming when 'cpu' was used, now it's a 'device' > > - internal structure to maintain registered devices > > - update users to the new API > > Patch 8 updates OPP framework helper function to be more generic, not > > CPU specific. > > > > The patch set is based on linux-pm branch linux-next 813946019dfd. > > > > Could you take the patch set via your linux-pm? I can do that, but I didn't realize that it was targeted at me, so I need some more time to review the patches. Thanks!
On 5/29/20 5:18 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 5:01 PM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Rafael, >> >> >> On 5/27/20 10:58 AM, Lukasz Luba wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Background of this version: >>> This is the v8 of the patch set and is has smaller scope. I had to split >>> the series into two: EM changes and thermal changes due to devfreq >>> dependencies. The patches from v7 9-14 which change devfreq cooling are >>> going to be sent in separate patch series, just after this set get merged >>> into mainline. These patches related to EM got acks and hopefully can go >>> through linux-pm tree. The later thermal patches will go through thermal >>> tree. >>> >>> The idea and purpose of the Energy Model framework changes: >>> This patch set introduces support for devices in the Energy Model (EM) >>> framework. It will unify the power model for thermal subsystem. It will >>> make simpler to add support for new devices willing to use more >>> advanced features (like Intelligent Power Allocation). Now it should >>> require less knowledge and effort for driver developer to add e.g. >>> GPU driver with simple energy model. A more sophisticated energy model >>> in the thermal framework is also possible, driver needs to provide >>> a dedicated callback function. More information can be found in the >>> updated documentation file. >>> >>> First 7 patches are refactoring Energy Model framework to add support >>> of other devices that CPUs. They change: >>> - naming convention from 'capacity' to 'performance' state, >>> - API arguments adding device pointer and not rely only on cpumask, >>> - change naming when 'cpu' was used, now it's a 'device' >>> - internal structure to maintain registered devices >>> - update users to the new API >>> Patch 8 updates OPP framework helper function to be more generic, not >>> CPU specific. >>> >>> The patch set is based on linux-pm branch linux-next 813946019dfd. >>> >> >> Could you take the patch set via your linux-pm? > > I can do that, but I didn't realize that it was targeted at me, so I > need some more time to review the patches. > > Thanks! > No worries. Thank you for your time! Regards, Lukasz
Hi Rafael, On 5/29/20 5:18 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 5:01 PM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Rafael, >> >> >> On 5/27/20 10:58 AM, Lukasz Luba wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Background of this version: >>> This is the v8 of the patch set and is has smaller scope. I had to split >>> the series into two: EM changes and thermal changes due to devfreq >>> dependencies. The patches from v7 9-14 which change devfreq cooling are >>> going to be sent in separate patch series, just after this set get merged >>> into mainline. These patches related to EM got acks and hopefully can go >>> through linux-pm tree. The later thermal patches will go through thermal >>> tree. >>> >>> The idea and purpose of the Energy Model framework changes: >>> This patch set introduces support for devices in the Energy Model (EM) >>> framework. It will unify the power model for thermal subsystem. It will >>> make simpler to add support for new devices willing to use more >>> advanced features (like Intelligent Power Allocation). Now it should >>> require less knowledge and effort for driver developer to add e.g. >>> GPU driver with simple energy model. A more sophisticated energy model >>> in the thermal framework is also possible, driver needs to provide >>> a dedicated callback function. More information can be found in the >>> updated documentation file. >>> >>> First 7 patches are refactoring Energy Model framework to add support >>> of other devices that CPUs. They change: >>> - naming convention from 'capacity' to 'performance' state, >>> - API arguments adding device pointer and not rely only on cpumask, >>> - change naming when 'cpu' was used, now it's a 'device' >>> - internal structure to maintain registered devices >>> - update users to the new API >>> Patch 8 updates OPP framework helper function to be more generic, not >>> CPU specific. >>> >>> The patch set is based on linux-pm branch linux-next 813946019dfd. >>> >> >> Could you take the patch set via your linux-pm? > > I can do that, but I didn't realize that it was targeted at me, so I > need some more time to review the patches. > > Thanks! > Gentle ping. I've resend the patch 4/8 [1] which addresses your comments and a comment regarding static analyzes conducted by Dan [2]. Do you need more time for this patch set? Maybe you would like me to help you with rebasing this series? Then please point me to the desired branch, I am happy to do this. Regards, Lukasz [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200610101223.7152-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/da0debe1-73da-33f1-c24e-154c2123c522@arm.com/