lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCHv1 7/8] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8998: Add PSCI cpuidle low power states
From
Date
On 10/05/2019 13:29, Amit Kucheria wrote:

> Add device bindings for cpuidle states for cpu devices.
>
> Cc: Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@linaro.org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi
> index 3fd0769fe648..208281f318e2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi
> @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@
> compatible = "arm,armv8";
> reg = <0x0 0x0>;
> enable-method = "psci";
> + cpu-idle-states = <&LITTLE_CPU_PD>;

For some reason, I was expecting the big cores to come first, but according
to /proc/cpuinfo, cores 0-3 are part 0x801, while cores 4-7 are part 0x800.

According to https://github.com/pytorch/cpuinfo/blob/master/src/arm/uarch.c

0x801 = Low-power Kryo 260 / 280 "Silver" -> Cortex-A53
0x800 = High-performance Kryo 260 (r10p2) / Kryo 280 (r10p1) "Gold" -> Cortex-A73

> efficiency = <1024>;
> next-level-cache = <&L2_0>;
> L2_0: l2-cache {
> @@ -97,6 +98,7 @@
> compatible = "arm,armv8";
> reg = <0x0 0x1>;
> enable-method = "psci";
> + cpu-idle-states = <&LITTLE_CPU_PD>;
> efficiency = <1024>;
> next-level-cache = <&L2_0>;
> L1_I_1: l1-icache {
> @@ -112,6 +114,7 @@
> compatible = "arm,armv8";
> reg = <0x0 0x2>;
> enable-method = "psci";
> + cpu-idle-states = <&LITTLE_CPU_PD>;
> efficiency = <1024>;
> next-level-cache = <&L2_0>;
> L1_I_2: l1-icache {
> @@ -127,6 +130,7 @@
> compatible = "arm,armv8";
> reg = <0x0 0x3>;
> enable-method = "psci";
> + cpu-idle-states = <&LITTLE_CPU_PD>;
> efficiency = <1024>;
> next-level-cache = <&L2_0>;
> L1_I_3: l1-icache {
> @@ -142,6 +146,7 @@
> compatible = "arm,armv8";
> reg = <0x0 0x100>;
> enable-method = "psci";
> + cpu-idle-states = <&BIG_CPU_PD>;
> efficiency = <1536>;
> next-level-cache = <&L2_1>;
> L2_1: l2-cache {
> @@ -161,6 +166,7 @@
> compatible = "arm,armv8";
> reg = <0x0 0x101>;
> enable-method = "psci";
> + cpu-idle-states = <&BIG_CPU_PD>;
> efficiency = <1536>;
> next-level-cache = <&L2_1>;
> L1_I_101: l1-icache {
> @@ -176,6 +182,7 @@
> compatible = "arm,armv8";
> reg = <0x0 0x102>;
> enable-method = "psci";
> + cpu-idle-states = <&BIG_CPU_PD>;
> efficiency = <1536>;
> next-level-cache = <&L2_1>;
> L1_I_102: l1-icache {
> @@ -191,6 +198,7 @@
> compatible = "arm,armv8";
> reg = <0x0 0x103>;
> enable-method = "psci";
> + cpu-idle-states = <&BIG_CPU_PD>;
> efficiency = <1536>;
> next-level-cache = <&L2_1>;
> L1_I_103: l1-icache {
> @@ -238,6 +246,30 @@
> };
> };
> };
> +
> + idle-states {
> + entry-method="psci";
> +
> + LITTLE_CPU_PD: little-power-down {
> + compatible = "arm,idle-state";
> + idle-state-name = "little-power-down";
> + arm,psci-suspend-param = <0x00000002>;
> + entry-latency-us = <43>;
> + exit-latency-us = <43>;

Little cores have higher latency (+5%) than big cores?

> + min-residency-us = <200>;
> + local-timer-stop;
> + };
> +
> + BIG_CPU_PD: big-power-down {
> + compatible = "arm,idle-state";
> + idle-state-name = "big-power-down";
> + arm,psci-suspend-param = <0x00000002>;
> + entry-latency-us = <41>;
> + exit-latency-us = <41>;
> + min-residency-us = <200>;
> + local-timer-stop;
> + };
> + };

What is the simplest way to test this patch?

Regards.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-10 15:16    [W:0.100 / U:101.316 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site