On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 12:02:48PM -0600, Lina Iyer wrote: [...] > I will not speak to any comparison of benchmarks between OSI and PC. > AFAIK, there are no platforms supporting both. > That's the fundamental issue here. So we have never ever done a proper comparison. > But, the OSI feature is critical for QCOM mobile platforms. The > last man activities during cpuidle save quite a lot of power. Powering > off the clocks, busses, regulators and even the oscillator is very > important to have a reasonable battery life when using the phone. > Platform coordinated approach falls quite short of the needs of a > powerful processor with a desired battery efficiency. > As mentioned above, without the actual comparison it's hard to justify that. While there are corner cases where OSI is able to make better judgement, may be we can add ways to deal with that in the firmware with PC mode, have we explored that before adding complexity to the OSPM ? Since the firmware complexity with OSI remains same as PC mode, isn't it worth checking if the corner case we are talking here can be handled in the firmware. -- Regards, Sudeep -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
