lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH V4 4/4] thermal/drivers/cpu_cooling: Rename to cpufreq_cooling
From
Date
On 09/12/2019 10:54, Martin Kepplinger wrote:
>
>
> On 06.12.19 15:15, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 06/12/2019 12:33, Martin Kepplinger wrote:
>>> I tested this on the librem5-devkit and see the
>>> cooling devices in sysfs. I configure ARM_PSCI_CPUIDLE, not ARM_CPUIDLE and
>>> add the patch below in register the cooling device there. "psci_idle"
>>> is listed as the cpuidle_driver.
>>>
>>> That's what I'm running, in case you want to see it all:
>>> https://source.puri.sm/martin.kepplinger/linux-next/commits/next-20191205/librem5_cpuidle_mainline_atf
>>>
>>> so I add a trip temperature description like this:
>>> https://source.puri.sm/martin.kepplinger/linux-next/commit/361f49f93ae2c477fd012790831cabd0ed976660
>>>
>>> When I let the SoC heat up, cpuidle cooling won't kick it. In sysfs:
>>>
>>> catting the relevant files in /sys/class/thermal after heating up,
>>> if that makes sense:
>>>
>>> 87000
>>> 85000
>>> 85000
>>> thermal-cpufreq-0
>>> 1
>>> thermal-idle-0
>>> 0
>>> thermal-idle-1
>>> 0
>>> thermal-idle-2
>>> 0
>>> thermal-idle-3
>>> 0
>>>
>>> with ARM_CPUIDLE instead of ARM_PSCI_CPUIDLE (and registering the cooling dev
>>> during cpuidle-arm.c init) I won't have a cpuidle driver and thus no cpu-sleep
>>> state at all.
>>>
>>> Can you see where the problem here lies?
>>
>> Yes, I removed the registration via the DT.
>>
>> Can you try the following:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c
>> b/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c
>> index d06d21a9525d..01367ddec49a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_states.c
>> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>> #include <linux/errno.h>
>> #include <linux/kernel.h>
>> #include <linux/module.h>
>> +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
>> #include <linux/of.h>
>> #include <linux/of_device.h>
>>
>> @@ -205,6 +206,9 @@ int dt_init_idle_driver(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
>> err = -EINVAL;
>> break;
>> }
>> +
>> + cpuidle_of_cooling_register(state_node, drv);
>> +
>> of_node_put(state_node);
>> }
>>
>> That's a hack for the moment.
>>
>
> thanks. I could test that successfully. The only question would be: Is
> is intentional how "non-aggressive" the cooling driver cools? I would
> have expected it to basically inject more idle cycles earlier. I'd set
> 75 degrees as trip point and at 85 degress is would only inject about 30
> (of 100).
>
> You describe the "config values" in question in the documentation, but
> I'm not sure what's the correct way to change them.

That is difficult to say without knowing the board behavior. Are you
able to profile the temperature with the load? How fast the temperature
increases? The aggressive behavior of the cooling device will depend on
the governor which depends on the slope of the temperature increase and
the sampling.

Can you give the pointer to the git tree with the DT definition of your
board?

You can try by changing the idle duration to 10ms instead of the default
4ms.

You can also change the cooling states in the DT <&state 20 70>, so it
will begin to mitigate at state 20. But I wouldn't recommend that.

Do you have the energy power model, so we can try with the IPA governor?



--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-09 13:04    [W:0.050 / U:6.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site