[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2160a0b8-59ec-03a1-1fd5-a3f98085be07@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 12:39:40 +0000
From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] thermal: netlink: Add a new event to notify CPU
capabilities change
Hi Ricardo,
On 11/6/21 1:33 AM, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> From: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
>
> Add a new netlink event to notify change in CPU capabilities in terms of
> performance and efficiency.
Is this going to be handled by some 'generic' tools? If yes, maybe
the values for 'performance' might be aligned with capacity
[0,1024] ? Or are they completely not related so the mapping is
simply impossible?
>
> Firmware may change CPU capabilities as a result of thermal events in the
> system or to account for changes in the TDP (thermal design power) level.
>
> This notification type will allow user space to avoid running workloads
> on certain CPUs or proactively adjust power limits to avoid future events.
>
> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/thermal/thermal_netlink.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/thermal/thermal_netlink.h | 13 ++++++++
> include/uapi/linux/thermal.h | 6 +++-
> 3 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
[snip]
>
> +struct cpu_capability {
> + int cpu;
> + int perf;
> + int eff;
Why not use the full names, instead of thse shortcuts? We use full
naming e.g. in cpufreq framework such as 'frequency' not 'freq'.
The 'eff' is really not meaningful ('perf' a bit less but it has
to meanings in kernel).
Regards,
Lukasz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists