Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Documentation: Add documentation for new platform_profile sysfs attribute | From | Mark Pearson <> | Date | Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:55:09 -0400 |
| |
Thanks Hans
On 26/10/2020 14:33, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi Mark, > > Thank you for this new version. > > On 10/26/20 6:44 PM, Mark Pearson wrote: >> From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> >> <snip>
>> + >> +If for some reason there is no good match when mapping then a new profile-name >> +may be added. Drivers which wish to introduce new profile-names must: >> +1. Have very good reasons to do so. >> +2. Add the new profile-name to this document, so that future drivers which also >> + have a similar problem can use the same new. > > s/same new/same name/ I've read this document so many times...I'm not sure how I missed that one. Thanks. > >> + Usually new profile-names will >> + be added to the "extra profile-names" section of this document. But in some >> + cases the set of standard profile-names may be extended. > > With the change from a more generic API to this new one more targeted towards DPTF > I would drop this part. OK - I have some questions then related to this change, below > > >> + >> +What: /sys/firmware/acpi/platform_profile_choices >> +Date: October 2020 >> +Contact: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> >> +Description: >> + Reading this file gives a space separated list of profiles >> + supported for this device. >> + >> + Drivers must use the following standard profile-names whenever >> + possible: >> + >> + low-power: Emphasises low power consumption >> + quiet: Offers quieter operation (lower fan >> + speed but with higher performance and >> + temperatures then seen in low-power > > I think the description here is a bit too specific, this may cause userspace > to have expectations which are not necessary true. I would describe this as > just: > > quiet: Emphasises quieter operation > Agreed. I'll update
>> + balanced: Balance between low power consumption >> + and performance >> + performance: Emphasises performance (and may lead to >> + higher temperatures and fan speeds) >> + >> + Userspace may expect drivers to offer at least several of these >> + standard profile-names! If none of the above are a good match >> + for some of the drivers profiles, then drivers may use one of >> + these extra profile-names: >> + <reserved for future use> >> + If we remove the extra profile-names section above then I think it should be removed here too. If someone wants to add a new 'mode' then it would be added to the list of 'standard names', and becomes a new option. Wanted to check I'm not missing something important.
>> +What: /sys/firmware/acpi/platform_profile >> +Date: October 2020 >> +Contact: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> >> +Description: >> + Reading this file gives the current selected profile for this >> + device. Writing this file with one of the strings from >> + available_profiles changes the profile to the new value. > > The part about custom profiles below may be dropped. That was intended for use > with e.g. GPUs but since this now strictly is a system-level profile API, the > part below can be dropped now. Agreed > > >> + >> + Reading this file may also return "custom". This is intended for >> + drivers which have and export multiple knobs. Such drivers may >> + very well still want to offer a set of profiles for easy of use >> + and to be able to offer a consistent standard API (this API) to >> + userspace for configuring their performance. The "custom" value >> + is intended for when ai user has directly configured the knobs >> + (through e.g. some advanced control-panel for a GPU) and the >> + knob values do not match any of the presets represented by the >> + platform-profiles. In this case writing this file will >> + override the modifications and restore the selected presets. >> + >> > > Regards, > > Hans > Thanks! mark
| |