| Message ID | 20220622145802.13032-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Energy Model power in micro-Watts and SCMI v3.1 alignment | expand |
Hi guys, Are there any objections to these patches? On 6/22/22 15:57, Lukasz Luba wrote: > Hi all, > > This is a patch set which changes Energy Model power values scale to > micro-Watts. It also upgrades the SCMI performance layer + scmi-cpufreq > driver to leverage the SCMI v3.1 spec and process micro-Watts power values > coming from FW. The higher precision in EM power field solves an issue > of a rounding error, which then can be misinterpreted as 'inefficient OPP'. > An example rounding issue calculation is present in patch 1/4 description. > > Regards, > Lukasz Luba > > Lukasz Luba (4): > PM: EM: convert power field to micro-Watts precision and align drivers > Documentation: EM: Switch to micro-Watts scale > firmware: arm_scmi: Get detailed power scale from perf > cpufreq: scmi: Support the power scale in micro-Watts in SCMI v3.1 > > Documentation/power/energy-model.rst | 14 +++--- > drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq-hw.c | 7 +-- > drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 15 ++++++- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c | 18 +++++--- > drivers/opp/of.c | 15 ++++--- > drivers/powercap/dtpm_cpu.c | 5 +-- > drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c | 13 +++++- > drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c | 19 ++++++-- > include/linux/energy_model.h | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++------- > include/linux/scmi_protocol.h | 8 +++- > kernel/power/energy_model.c | 31 ++++++++----- > 11 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-) > I would like to move forward with the micro-Watts in the Energy Model. We have feedback from our partners that this is a limitation. Also, as you can see this uW is part of the new SCMI spec, which we have support on our roadmap. Regards, Lukasz
On 29-06-22, 10:49, Lukasz Luba wrote: > I would like to move forward with the micro-Watts in > the Energy Model. We have feedback from our partners > that this is a limitation. Also, as you can see > this uW is part of the new SCMI spec, which we > have support on our roadmap. Should I pick them and merge via PM tree ?
Hi Viresh, On 6/29/22 10:53, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 29-06-22, 10:49, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> I would like to move forward with the micro-Watts in >> the Energy Model. We have feedback from our partners >> that this is a limitation. Also, as you can see >> this uW is part of the new SCMI spec, which we >> have support on our roadmap. > > Should I pick them and merge via PM tree ? > Thanks for fast response. It would be great. I have 2 ACKs from Sudeep for the SCMI part, but I don't know the status e.g. of DTPM current work which is using the EM milli-Watts and does conversion to uW internally. I hope, I won't make issues to Daniel's work with this change.
On 29-06-22, 11:00, Lukasz Luba wrote: > Thanks for fast response. It would be great. > > I have 2 ACKs from Sudeep for the SCMI part, > but I don't know the status e.g. of DTPM > current work which is using the EM milli-Watts > and does conversion to uW internally. > I hope, I won't make issues to Daniel's work with this > change. Daniel, do you have any objections to this ?
Hi Lukasz, On 29/06/2022 12:01, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 29-06-22, 11:00, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> Thanks for fast response. It would be great. >> >> I have 2 ACKs from Sudeep for the SCMI part, >> but I don't know the status e.g. of DTPM >> current work which is using the EM milli-Watts >> and does conversion to uW internally. >> I hope, I won't make issues to Daniel's work with this >> change. > > Daniel, do you have any objections to this ? Sorry I had no time to review the series yet, give me a couple of days, may be a bit more if possible
Hi Daniel, On 6/29/22 11:21, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > Hi Lukasz, > > On 29/06/2022 12:01, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> On 29-06-22, 11:00, Lukasz Luba wrote: >>> Thanks for fast response. It would be great. >>> >>> I have 2 ACKs from Sudeep for the SCMI part, >>> but I don't know the status e.g. of DTPM >>> current work which is using the EM milli-Watts >>> and does conversion to uW internally. >>> I hope, I won't make issues to Daniel's work with this >>> change. >> >> Daniel, do you have any objections to this ? > > Sorry I had no time to review the series yet, give me a couple of days, > may be a bit more if possible > > OK, take your time. I hope this could land as a material for v5.20, we still have some time. Regards, Lukasz