[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <07e778b5-07bd-94e1-1fc0-876fa21ac7ac@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2023 17:00:49 +0100
From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc: rui.zhang@...el.com, amit.kucheria@...durent.com,
amit.kachhap@...il.com, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, len.brown@...el.com, pavel@....cz,
Pierre.Gondois@....com, ionela.voinescu@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
rafael@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/17] PM: EM: Refactor struct em_perf_domain and add
default_table
On 5/30/23 11:23, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 12/05/2023 11:57, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>> The Energy Model support runtime modifications. Refactor old
>> implementation which accessed struct em_perf_state and introduce
>> em_perf_domain::default_table to clean up the design. This new field
>> is better aligned with em_perf_domain::runtime_table and helps to
>> distinguish them better.
>>
>> Update all drivers or frameworks which used the old field:
>> em_perf_domain::table and now should use em_perf_domain::default_table.
>
> I still believe that doing this refactoring before the introducation o
> the new feature `runtime modifiable EM` would do wonders on the
> tangibility of the other patches in this set.
>
> [...]
>
Let me move that refactor patch a bit earlier in the series...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists