Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 4 Apr 2022 13:35:35 +0100 | Subject | Re: [RESEND][PATCH 0/8] Introduce support for artificial Energy Model | From | Lukasz Luba <> |
| |
Hi Rafael,
The patch set has been on LKML for quite a while and got one ACK, for the code touching something outside the EM (thermal cooling).
AFAICS there is no interest and objections from others for this code.
Therefore, I have a question: What would be be process to have merge this code? (We had internally a few reviews of this code)
On 3/21/22 09:57, Lukasz Luba wrote: > Hi all, > > This patch set adds new callback and support for artificial Energy Model (EM). > The new EMs have artificially generated performance states. > Such EMs can be created from lean information sources, such > as the relative energy efficiency between CPUs. The ACPI based > platforms provide this information > (ACPI 6.4, s5.2.12.14 'GIC CPU Interface (GICC) Structure' > 'Processor Power efficiency Class' field). > > Artificial EMs might require to directly provide the 'cost' of > the generated performance state. This patch set adds a new callback > .get_cost() for this. The EM framework does not force any model > or formula, it's up to the platform code. > > Artificial EMs aim to leverage the Energy Aware Scheduler > (EAS). Other frameworks relying on performance states > information (i.e. IPA/DTPM) must be informed of the > EM type and might be prevented from using it. This patch > sets also does this by introducing a new flag: > EM_PERF_DOMAIN_ARTIFICIAL. > > The patch set is based on current linux-next, where some > changes to OPP & EM are queuing. > > The patch set also contains (patch 7/8 and patch 8/8) logic which prevents > two EM's client frameworks from using this new EM type. Some other approach, > using 'milli-watts', has been proposed and discussed, but refused [1]. > This new flag is more precised and should not leave space for > wrong interpretation. > > Shortly after this patch set you will see a patch set implementing the > platform code and registering this new EM. >
No one from Arm is an official maintainer of the EM code.
Regards, Lukasz
| |