On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 07:37:04PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:34:16AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 01:37:16PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 07:01:44PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > > > The names of the struct members for RPS are stupid. Every time I need to > > > > do anything in this code I have to spend a significant amount of time to > > > > remember what it all means. By renaming the variables (and adding the > > > > comments) I hope to clear up the situation. Indeed doing this make some > > > > upcoming patches more readable. > > > > > > > > I've avoided ILK because it's possible that the naming used for Ironlake > > > > matches what is in the docs. I believe the ILK power docs were never > > > > published, and I am too lazy to dig them up. > > > > > > > > While there may be mistakes, this patch was mostly done via sed. The > > > > renaming of "hw_max" required a bit of interactivity. > > > > > > It lost the distinction between RPe and RPn. I am in favour of keeping > > > RP0, RP1, RPe, RPn for the hardware/spec values and adding the set of > > > soft values used for actual interaction. > > > -Chris > > > > > > > And what is the difference between RPe, and RPn? I honestly have no clue > > what RPe is. > > It's a mythical beast on Valleyview for an inflection point in the > power/performance curve that the hardware designers recommend using. > -Chris >
Isn't that exactly what RPn is supposed to be? -- Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
