[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181002135032.GF26858@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 15:50:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
mingo@...hat.com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
morten.rasmussen@....com, chris.redpath@....com,
patrick.bellasi@....com, valentin.schneider@....com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, thara.gopinath@...aro.org,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, tkjos@...gle.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
smuckle@...gle.com, adharmap@...eaurora.org,
skannan@...eaurora.org, pkondeti@...eaurora.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, edubezval@...il.com,
srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com, currojerez@...eup.net,
javi.merino@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 03/14] PM: Introduce an Energy Model management
framework
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 01:54:17PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 Oct 2018 at 14:25:35 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Should we explicitly mention that this ignores idle costs?
>
> More doc shouldn't hurt so I can add a little something if you feel it's
> needed.
Yes please, every time I read that thing I wonder about idle energy.
Then I remember we talked about this and it is expressly ignored.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists