lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2 1/3] ufs: core: Add CPU latency QoS support for ufs driver
From


On 12/5/2023 10:41 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 12/4/23 21:58, Naresh Maramaina wrote:
>> On 12/5/2023 12:30 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> On 12/4/23 06:30, Maramaina Naresh wrote:
>>>> +    /* This capability allows the host controller driver to use the
>>>> PM QoS
>>>> +     * feature.
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    UFSHCD_CAP_PM_QOS                = 1 << 13,
>>>>   };
>>>
>>> Why does it depend on the host driver whether or not PM QoS is
>>> enabled? Why isn't it enabled unconditionally?
>>
>> For some platform vendors power KPI might be more important than
>> random io KPI. Hence this flag is disabled by default and can be
>> enabled based on platform requirement.
>
> How about leaving this flag out unless if a host vendor asks explicitly
> for this flag?

IMHO, instead of completely removing this flag, how about having
flag like "UFSHCD_CAP_DISABLE_PM_QOS" which will make PMQOS enable
by default and if some host vendor wants to disable it explicitly,
they can enable that flag.
Please let me know your opinion.

>>>
>>>> + * @pm_qos_req: PM QoS request handle
>>>> + * @pm_qos_init: flag to check if pm qos init completed
>>>>    */
>>>
>>> Documentation for pm_qos_init is missing.
>>>
>> Sorry, i didn't get your comment, i have already added documentation
>> for @pm_qos_init, @pm_qos_req variable as above. Do you want me to add
>> this information some where else as well?
>
> Oops, I meant 'qos_vote'.

Sure. I'll take of this in next patchset.

>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>

Thanks,
Naresh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-12-06 15:06    [W:0.112 / U:1.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site