[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <09b680a5-a118-8c6e-0ae1-03ab5f10c573@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2020 18:05:03 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-imx@....com
Cc: Morten.Rasmussen@....com, Dietmar.Eggemann@....com,
javi.merino@....com, cw00.choi@...sung.com,
b.zolnierkie@...sung.com, rjw@...ysocki.net, sudeep.holla@....com,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, nm@...com, sboyd@...nel.org,
rui.zhang@...el.com, amit.kucheria@...durent.com, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
qperret@...gle.com, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
shawnguo@...nel.org, s.hauer@...gutronix.de, festevam@...il.com,
kernel@...gutronix.de, khilman@...nel.org, agross@...nel.org,
bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, robh@...nel.org,
matthias.bgg@...il.com, steven.price@....com,
tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com, alyssa.rosenzweig@...labora.com,
airlied@...ux.ie, daniel@...ll.ch, liviu.dudau@....com,
lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, patrick.bellasi@...bug.net,
orjan.eide@....com, rdunlap@...radead.org, mka@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] PM / EM: add devices to Energy Model
Hi Lukasz,
On 18/03/2020 12:45, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> Add support of other devices into the Energy Model framework not only the
> CPUs. Change the interface to be more unified which can handle other
> devices as well.
thanks for taking care of that. Overall I like the changes in this patch
but it hard to review in details because the patch is too big :/
Could you split this patch into smaller ones?
eg. (at your convenience)
- One patch renaming s/cap/perf/
- One patch adding a new function:
em_dev_register_perf_domain(struct device *dev,
unsigned int nr_states,
struct em_data_callback *cb);
(+ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL)
And em_register_perf_domain() using it.
- One converting the em_register_perf_domain() user to
em_dev_register_perf_domain
- One adding the different new 'em' functions
- And finally one removing em_register_perf_domain().
> Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
> ---
[ ... ]
> 2. Core APIs
> @@ -70,14 +72,16 @@ CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL must be enabled to use the EM framework.
> Drivers are expected to register performance domains into the EM framework by
> calling the following API::
>
> - int em_register_perf_domain(cpumask_t *span, unsigned int nr_states,
> - struct em_data_callback *cb);
> + int em_register_perf_domain(struct device *dev, unsigned int nr_states,
> + struct em_data_callback *cb, cpumask_t *cpus);
Isn't possible to get rid of this cpumask by using
cpufreq_cpu_get() which returns the cpufreq's policy and from their get
the related cpus ?
[ ... ]
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists