Hi, On Thursday, September 01, 2011, Jean Pihet wrote: > Rafael, > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This patchset illustrates how device PM QoS may be used along with > > PM domains in my view. > > > > Actually, it consists of two parts. Namely, patches [1-3/5] seem to be > > suitable for 3.2, unless somebody hates them, > The patches [1-3/5] are ok (reviewed only) excepted some remarks I have. OK, thanks for the comments. > > but patches [4-5/5] are > > total RFC. They haven't been tested, only compiled, so the use of them > > is not encouraged (they may kill your dog or make your cat go wild, or > > do something equally nasty, so beware). > That looks like a disclaimer ;p > > > Their purpose is to illustrate > > an idea that I'd like to discuss at the PM miniconference during the > > LPC. > There is some code for OMAP that dynamically updates the worst case > values for devices activation and de-activation; > cf._omap_device_activate and _omap_device_deactivate in > arch/arm/plat-omap/omap_device.c. The idea is to start with reference > figures (worst case measured on board) at boot and then update the > worst case values at runtime. > Based on the PM QoS values and the worst case latency values the next > power domains states can be determined. Unfortunately this is not > (yet) implemented. I thought about that too, but I'd like to discuss the basic idea first. > I am wondering if the patches [4-5/5] are meant to replace the OMAP > code, which would be really nice. I certainly hope they will be useful for multiple platforms. Whether or not OMAP turns out to be one of them I can't tell at the moment. Thanks, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
