Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Feb 2022 11:40:33 +0000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Introduce 'advanced' Energy Model in DT | From | Lukasz Luba <> |
| |
On 2/23/22 11:27, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 23-02-22, 11:22, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> On 2/23/22 10:43, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>> On 23-02-22, 10:52, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>>> why not extend the energy model to any kind of devices? >>> >>> FWIW, the OPP core supports a wide range of devices now, not just CPUs. > > There are many other devices which still use Freq. > >> Is that the "opp-level" thing which would allow that? > > For power supplies/regulators, we don't have freq and they use level, right. > > Also for interconnect we use bandwidth, in a similar way. > >> I can see some DT files with regulators(?) using it e.g. [1]. >> It looks flexible, the opp-hz is not hard requirement, >> the opp-level can be used instead IIUC. > > Right. >
Looks good. It also doesn't collide with this patch set.
We could have an opp entry like:
opp_1: opp-1 { opp-level = <1>; opp-microwatt = <200000>; };
Daniel would that design make sense to you?
If yes, we could discuss this further after this first step for fixing GPU in merged. I would need to re-think the EM em_perf_state and maybe the new ::level there.
| |