Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 30 Jan 2019 10:57:52 +0530 | From | Viresh Kumar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3] drivers: Frequency constraint infrastructure |
| |
On 28-01-19, 14:04, Qais Yousef wrote: > But we have no way to enforce this, no? I'm thinking if frequency can be > constrained in PM QoS framework, then we will end up with some drivers that > think it's a good idea to use it and potentially end up breaking this "should > not work against schedutil and similar". > > Or did I miss something? > > My point is that if we introduce something too generic we might end up > encouraging more users and end up with a complex set of rules/interactions and > lose some determinism. But I could be reading too much into it :-)
People are free to use notifiers today as well and there is nobody stopping them. A new framework/layer may actually make them more accountable as we can easily record which all entities have requested to impose a freq-limit on CPUs.
-- viresh
| |