lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] drivers: Frequency constraint infrastructure
On 11-01-19, 10:47, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 10:18 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This commit introduces the frequency constraint infrastructure, which
> > provides a generic interface for parts of the kernel to constraint the
> > working frequency range of a device.
> >
> > The primary users of this are the cpufreq and devfreq frameworks. The
> > cpufreq framework already implements such constraints with help of
> > notifier chains (for thermal and other constraints) and some local code
> > (for user-space constraints). The devfreq framework developers have also
> > shown interest [1] in such a framework, which may use it at a later
> > point of time.
> >
> > The idea here is to provide a generic interface and get rid of the
> > notifier based mechanism.
> >
> > Only one constraint is added for now for the cpufreq framework and the
> > rest will follow after this stuff is merged.
> >
> > Matthias Kaehlcke was involved in the preparation of the first draft of
> > this work and so I have added him as Co-author to the first patch.
> > Thanks Matthias.
> >
> > FWIW, This doesn't have anything to do with the boot-constraints
> > framework [2] I was trying to upstream earlier :)
>
> This is quite a bit of code to review, so it will take some time.

@Rafael: You are going to provide some more feedback here, right ?

> One immediate observation is that it seems to do quite a bit of what
> is done in the PM QoS framework, so maybe there is an opportunity for
> some consolidation in there.

--
viresh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-08 10:10    [W:0.152 / U:1.576 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site