On 23/03/2021 16:56, Lukasz Luba wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 3/19/21 4:28 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> Currently the dtpm supports the CPUs via cpufreq and the energy >> model. This change provides the same for the device which supports >> devfreq. >> >> Each device supporting devfreq and having an energy model can register >> themselves in the list of supported devices. >> >> The concept is the same as the cpufreq dtpm support: the QoS is used >> to aggregate the requests and the energy model gives the value of the >> instantaneous power consumption ponderated by the load of the device. >> > > > I've just started the review, but I have a blocking question: > > Why there is no unregister function (like 'dtmp_unregister_devfreq')? > Do you consider any devfreq drivers to be modules? > > The code looks like an API that it's going to be called directly in > e.g. GPU driver in it's probe function. In that case probably the > module unloading should call dtmp unregister. > > Could you explain this to me please? So I can continue the review.
BTW, thanks for taking the time to review the patch. -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
