Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Date | Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:50:01 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/7] Minor cleanup for thermal gov power allocator |
| |
Hi Lukasz,
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 4:19 PM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > Gentle ping > > On 10/26/23 13:22, Lukasz Luba wrote: > > > > > > On 10/26/23 09:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 9:21 PM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> The patch set does some small clean up for Intelligent Power Allocator. > >>> Those changes are not expected to alter the general functionality. > >>> They just > >>> improve the code reading. Only patch 3/7 might improve the use case for > >>> binding the governor to thermal zone (very unlikely in real products, > >>> but > >>> it's needed for correctness). > >>> > >>> The changes are based on top of current PM thermal branch, so with the > >>> new trip points. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Lukasz > >>> > >>> Lukasz Luba (7): > >>> thermal: gov_power_allocator: Rename trip_max_desired_temperature > >>> thermal: gov_power_allocator: Setup trip points earlier > >>> thermal: gov_power_allocator: Check the cooling devices only for > >>> trip_max > >>> thermal: gov_power_allocator: Rearrange the order of variables > >>> thermal: gov_power_allocator: Use shorter variable when possible > >>> thermal: gov_power_allocator: Remove unneeded local variables > >>> thermal: gov_power_allocator: Clean needed variables at the beginning > >>> > >>> drivers/thermal/gov_power_allocator.c | 123 ++++++++++++++------------ > >>> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> -- > >> > >> The series looks good to me overall, but I'd prefer to make these > >> changes in the 6.8 cycle, because the 6.7 merge window is around the > >> corner and there is quite a bit of thermal material in this cycle > >> already. > > > > Thanks for having a look! Yes, I agree, we can wait after the > > merge window. It just have to be cleaned one day a bit and I postponed > > this a few times, so no rush ;) > > I've seen you've created the new pm/thermal. Could you consider to take > those in, please?
Sure, I'll get to them presumably tomorrow and if not then early next week.
> I would send some RFC on top showing the issue with reading back the CPU > max frequency from the PM_QoS chain.
Sounds good.
| |