On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:50:10PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 15/09/2020 19:24, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > > +Thermal folks > > > > Hi Rajendra, > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 11:14:00AM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > >> Hi Rob, > >> > >> There has been some discussions on another thread [1] around the DPC (dynamic-power-coefficient) values > >> for CPU's being relative vs absolute (based on real power) and should they be used to derive 'real' power > >> at various OPPs in order to calculate things like 'sustainable-power' for thermal zones. > >> I believe relative values work perfectly fine for scheduling decisions, but with others using this for > >> calculating power values in mW, is there a need to document the property as something that *has* to be > >> based on real power measurements? > > > > Relative values may work for scheduling decisions, but not for thermal > > management with the power allocator, at least not when CPU cooling devices > > are combined with others that specify their power consumption in absolute > > values. Such a configuration should be supported IMO. > > The energy model is used in the cpufreq cooling device and if the > sustainable power is consistent with the relative values then there is > no reason it shouldn't work. Agreed on thermal zones that exclusively use CPUs as cooling devices, but what when you have mixed zones, with CPUs with their pseudo-unit and e.g. a GPU that specifies its power in mW?
