linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] Introduce Bandwidth OPPs for interconnects

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190729093545.kvnqxjkyx4nogddk@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Mon, 29 Jul 2019 15:05:45 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, seansw@....qualcomm.com,
        daidavid1@...eaurora.org, adharmap@...eaurora.org,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>, sibis@...eaurora.org,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, evgreen@...omium.org,
        kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] Introduce Bandwidth OPPs for interconnects

On 26-07-19, 16:15, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Interconnects and interconnect paths quantify their performance levels in
> terms of bandwidth and not in terms of frequency. So similar to how we have
> frequency based OPP tables in DT and in the OPP framework, we need
> bandwidth OPP table support in DT and in the OPP framework.
> 
> So with the DT bindings added in this patch series, the DT for a GPU
> that does bandwidth voting from GPU to Cache and GPU to DDR would look
> something like this:
> 
> gpu_cache_opp_table: gpu_cache_opp_table {
> 	compatible = "operating-points-v2";
> 
> 	gpu_cache_3000: opp-3000 {
> 		opp-peak-KBps = <3000000>;
> 		opp-avg-KBps = <1000000>;
> 	};
> 	gpu_cache_6000: opp-6000 {
> 		opp-peak-KBps = <6000000>;
> 		opp-avg-KBps = <2000000>;
> 	};
> 	gpu_cache_9000: opp-9000 {
> 		opp-peak-KBps = <9000000>;
> 		opp-avg-KBps = <9000000>;
> 	};
> };
> 
> gpu_ddr_opp_table: gpu_ddr_opp_table {
> 	compatible = "operating-points-v2";
> 
> 	gpu_ddr_1525: opp-1525 {
> 		opp-peak-KBps = <1525000>;
> 		opp-avg-KBps = <452000>;
> 	};
> 	gpu_ddr_3051: opp-3051 {
> 		opp-peak-KBps = <3051000>;
> 		opp-avg-KBps = <915000>;
> 	};
> 	gpu_ddr_7500: opp-7500 {
> 		opp-peak-KBps = <7500000>;
> 		opp-avg-KBps = <3000000>;
> 	};
> };
> 
> gpu_opp_table: gpu_opp_table {
> 	compatible = "operating-points-v2";
> 	opp-shared;
> 
> 	opp-200000000 {
> 		opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <200000000>;
> 	};
> 	opp-400000000 {
> 		opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <400000000>;
> 	};
> };
> 
> gpu@...4000 {
> 	...
> 	operating-points-v2 = <&gpu_opp_table>, <&gpu_cache_opp_table>, <&gpu_ddr_opp_table>;
> 	...
> };

One feedback I missed giving earlier. Will it be possible to get some
user code merged along with this ? I want to make sure anything we add
ends up getting used.

That also helps understanding the problems you are facing in a better
way, i.e. with real examples.

-- 
viresh