[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <20130812122614.0d4d31a3@amdc308.digital.local>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:26:14 +0200
From: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Eduardo Valentin <eduardo.valentin@...com>,
"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com>,
Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...ess.pl>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>, durgadoss.r@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/8] cpufreq:boost:Kconfig: Provide support for software
managed BOOST
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:28:02 +0530 Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@...aro.org
wrote,
> On 26 July 2013 16:51, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:54:56 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> >> On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > +config CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
> >> > + bool
> >>
> >> Invisible is fine but this must be disabled by default and must
> >> depend on thermal, rather than moving dependency on platform's
> >> config.
> >
> > The CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW [1] is a generic flag (invisible).
> >
> > I will add "default n" to it.
>
> Leave it.. We don't need it now.. that's how these kind of config
> options are defined as they are disabled by default.
Ok. Please see below proposition.
>
> > Depending only on [3], results at situation where SW BOOST can be
> > enabled at x86 or ARM target with only generic THERMAL support
> > (which doesn't protect from overheating).
>
> I had a similar concern.. Currently also we aren't stopping anybody to
> enable boost. By selecting thermal from CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW, atleast
> we are communicating this very well to developers that they need
> something else as well. And currently we only have thermal as a source
> for telling when to block boost but it can be something else too..
>
> I never said, don't use EXYNOS_THERMAL, its good to have a
> dependency on it in the Exynos specific config for boost, but I wanted
> normal sw boost also to depend on thermal..
1. at ./drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig:
+config CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
+ bool
+ depends on THERMAL
2. at ./drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm:
+config ARM_EXYNOS_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
+ bool "EXYNOS Frequency Overclocking - Software"
+ depends on ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ
+ select CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
+ select EXYNOS_THERMAL
+ default n
+ help
+ This driver supports software managed overclocking (BOOST).
+ It allows usage of special frequencies for Samsung Exynos
+ processors if thermal conditions are appropriate.
+
+ It reguires, for safe operation, thermal framework with
properly
+ defined trip points.
+
+ If in doubt, say N.
+
Shall I split this patch to two (1. and 2.) or leave it as a single one?
--
Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
--
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