RE: ia64 acpi-cpufreq driver

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:bjorn.helgaas@xxxxxx] 
>Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 10:51 AM
>To: Pallipadi, Venkatesh
>Cc: linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: ia64 acpi-cpufreq driver
>
>On Monday 23 October 2006 22:46, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
>> Actually it is slightly different from low_level_read and write. 
>> Generic ACPI definition of ACPI PERF_CTRL and PERF_STATUS define 
>> them as if they are registers. But, with FfixedHW, ACPI allows 
>> architectures to implement this functionality in a native way.
>> Just like x86 implements FfixedHW based P-state support in 16 bits 
>> of some known MSR (Note the register field itself in _PCT is 
>not used)
>> or FFH C-states are supported by native instructions like "hlt",
>> "monitor-mwait".
>> 
>> So, when firmware tells P-state are FFH, OS will look at the 
>hardware 
>> and processor information and use appropriate native interfaces. 
>> In this case, appropriate native interface is PAL_GET_PSTATE 
>> and PAL_SET_PSTATE.
>
>Clearly ia64 ultimately has to use PAL_SET_PSTATE.  My question
>is, does the PAL_SET_PSTATE call belong in acpi-cpufreq, or does
>it belong in the FFH driver?
>
>I think it belongs in the latter, because the OSPM can be more
>generic if the architecture-specific stuff is in the FFH driver.
>
>Another way to ask this is, if ia64 had an FFH driver, who would
>use it?  I assume acpi-cpufreq would be one user.  If so, what
>interface would acpi-cpufreq use to access FFH?
>

Yes. As it is today, acpi-cpufreq contains FFH driver functionality 
in itself. It calls acpi and cpufreq arch-independent interfaces but 
implements FFH internally. 

By, FFH driver do you mean to handle FFH related functions only for 
P-states or something that can handle all FFH functions (like C-states,
etc). 
I don't see any other kernel part/or driver will use this particular 
PAL_GET_PSTATE and PAL_SET_PSTATE intefaces. So, my feeling is we don't
need a separate FFH driver.

Thanks,
Venki
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux