On 04-08-20, 11:44, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> On 8/4/20 11:38 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > I don't think doing it with help of firmware is the right thing to do
> > here then. For another platform we may not have a firmware which can
> > help us, we need something in the opp core itself for that. Lemme s
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 10:33:02AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
>
> On 8/5/2020 9:03 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 06:34:36PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> On 05-08-20, 12:04, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> >>> I know that Viresh is going to develop patches and improve these
> >>>
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 06:34:36PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 05-08-20, 12:04, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > I know that Viresh is going to develop patches and improve these
> > cpufreq stats framework. Maybe he also had this 'aggregation' in mind.
> > I will leave it him.
>
> I am only going to look
On 8/4/20 6:27 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
On 7/29/2020 8:12 AM, Lukasz Luba wrote:
Hi all,
The existing CPUFreq framework does not tracks the statistics when the
'fast switch' is used or when firmware changes the frequency independently
due to e.g. thermal reasons. However, the firmware m
On 8/5/2020 9:03 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 06:34:36PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 05-08-20, 12:04, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>> I know that Viresh is going to develop patches and improve these
>>> cpufreq stats framework. Maybe he also had this 'aggregation' in mind.
>>> I
On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 10:19:23AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
>
> On 7/31/2020 8:56 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:36:51AM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> >>
> >> In this case I think we would have to create debugfs.
> >> Sudeep do you think these debugfs should be exposed
On 05-08-20, 12:04, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> I know that Viresh is going to develop patches and improve these
> cpufreq stats framework. Maybe he also had this 'aggregation' in mind.
> I will leave it him.
I am only going to look at cpufreq's view of stats independently from
the firmware.
--
viresh
On 7/29/2020 8:12 AM, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The existing CPUFreq framework does not tracks the statistics when the
> 'fast switch' is used or when firmware changes the frequency independently
> due to e.g. thermal reasons. However, the firmware might track the frequency
> changes and
On 7/31/2020 8:56 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:36:51AM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>
>> In this case I think we would have to create debugfs.
>> Sudeep do you think these debugfs should be exposed from the protocol
>> layer:
>> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
>
> I prefe
On 8/4/20 11:38 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 04-08-20, 11:29, Lukasz Luba wrote:
On 8/4/20 6:35 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
IIUC, the only concern right now is to capture stats with fast switch ? Maybe we
can do something else in that case and brainstorm a bit..
Correct, the fast switch is the o
On 04-08-20, 11:29, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> On 8/4/20 6:35 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > IIUC, the only concern right now is to capture stats with fast switch ?
> > Maybe we
> > can do something else in that case and brainstorm a bit..
>
> Correct, the fast switch is the only concern right now and not
On 8/4/20 6:35 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 30-07-20, 10:36, Lukasz Luba wrote:
On 7/30/20 10:10 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 02:23:33PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 29-07-20, 16:12, Lukasz Luba wrote:
The existing CPUFreq framework does not tracks the statistics when the
On 30-07-20, 10:36, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> On 7/30/20 10:10 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 02:23:33PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 29-07-20, 16:12, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > > > The existing CPUFreq framework does not tracks the statistics when the
> > > > 'fast switch' is us
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:36:51AM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>
> In this case I think we would have to create debugfs.
> Sudeep do you think these debugfs should be exposed from the protocol
> layer:
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
I prefer above over cpufreq as we can support for all the devi
On 7/30/20 10:10 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 02:23:33PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 29-07-20, 16:12, Lukasz Luba wrote:
The existing CPUFreq framework does not tracks the statistics when the
'fast switch' is used or when firmware changes the frequency independently
due
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 02:23:33PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 29-07-20, 16:12, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > The existing CPUFreq framework does not tracks the statistics when the
> > 'fast switch' is used or when firmware changes the frequency independently
> > due to e.g. thermal reasons. However,
On 29-07-20, 16:12, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> The existing CPUFreq framework does not tracks the statistics when the
> 'fast switch' is used or when firmware changes the frequency independently
> due to e.g. thermal reasons. However, the firmware might track the frequency
> changes and expose this to th
17 matches
Mail list logo
