[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YzRBLiHByw5xPaU3@e126311.manchester.arm.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2022 13:42:22 +0100
From: Kajetan Puchalski <kajetan.puchalski@....com>
To: rafael@...nel.org
Cc: daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, lukasz.luba@....com,
Dietmar.Eggemann@....com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] cpuidle: teo: Introduce optional util-awareness
Hi Rafael,
Just a gentle ping here. Could you please take a look at this
discussion?
I'd like to address some comments I received, especially on the subject
of making it reduce the state by one as opposed to going all the way to
0 to account for different hardware and how we can accomodate different
architectures in the implementation of that mechanism.
Before I send a v2 it'd be great to know your opinions on this and
whether I should still send it as a TEO patch or fork it into a separate
governor and make the changes there as both Doug and I seem to prefer.
Thank you in advance for you time,
Kajetan
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 05:44:10PM +0100, Kajetan Puchalski wrote:
> At the very least this approach seems promising so I wanted to discuss it in RFC form first.
> Thank you for taking your time to read this!
>
> [1] https://github.com/mrkajetanp/lisa-notebooks/blob/a2361a5b647629bfbfc676b942c8e6498fb9bd03/idle_util_aware.pdf
>
> Kajetan Puchalski (1):
> cpuidle: teo: Introduce optional util-awareness
>
> drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig | 12 +++++
> drivers/cpuidle/governors/teo.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 98 insertions(+)
>
> --
> 2.37.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists