[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2d5e7eff-ae9d-2c67-3f49-89cb006b4a1b@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 19:55:21 +0000
From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, rafael@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] powercap/drivers/dtpm: Encapsulate even more the code
Hi Daniel,
On 3/8/21 7:31 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
> On 01/03/2021 22:21, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> In order to increase the self-encapsulation of the dtpm generic code,
>> the following changes are adding a power update ops to the dtpm
>> ops. That allows the generic code to call directly the dtpm backend
>> function to update the power values.
>>
>> The power update function does compute the power characteristics when
>> the function is invoked. In the case of the CPUs, the power
>> consumption depends on the number of online CPUs. The online CPUs mask
>> is not up to date at CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN state in the tear down
>> callback. That is the reason why the online / offline are at separate
>> state. As there is already an existing state for DTPM, this one is
>> only moved to the DEAD state, so there is no addition of new state
>> with these changes.
>>
>> That simplifies the code for the next changes and results in a more
>> self-encapsulated code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
>
> Is there any comment on this series ?
If you can wait 1 day, I will review it tomorrow...
I was quite busy recently and put it at the end of my list.
Regards,
Lukasz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists