[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK44p224FTbnBXOo34TPgB2dKjT1x-rGbDB+kPitvNhoXy35Tg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:22:09 +0530
From: Amit Kachhap <amit.kachhap@...aro.org>
To: Sundar <sunder.svit@...il.com>
Cc: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>, len.brown@...el.com,
linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
mark.gross@...el.com, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 2/4] thermal: Add generic cpufreq cooling implementation
On 13 March 2012 15:44, Sundar <sunder.svit@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org> wrote:
>> Sundar,
>
> Hi Amit,
>
>> At the moment it doesn't. But there was some discussion around
>> creating something that will work with devfreq. This would allow
>> peripheral drivers to be plugged in as well. Amit is investigating
>> that at present.
>
> What if we work towards a generic constraint framework which models
> thermals as a performance constraint.
>
> Drivers can register to this constraint; platform code can then decide
> to issue restrictions either to the CPU or other power-hungry
> peripherals based on the platform conditions.
>
> That also allows to model CPU frequency as a generic constraint but
> via an actual consumer, say the thermal driver.
Yes that should be helpful. Even the things your are suggesting are
somewhat same with some patches submitted which sets cpufreq min/max
constraint.
>
> Cheers!
>
> --
> ---------
> The views expressed in this email are personal and do not necessarily
> echo my employers.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists