On 29-01-19, 09:15, Quentin Perret wrote:

On Tuesday 29 Jan 2019 at 10:51:44 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:

quoted

On 28-01-19, 11:36, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:

quoted

I think this patch will result in error messages at registration on
platforms that use the cpufreq-dt driver and don't specify
'dynamic-power-coefficient' for the CPUs in the DT. Not sure if that's
a problem as long as the cpufreq initialization succeeds regardless,
it could be seen as a not-so-gentle nudge to add the values.

That wouldn't be acceptable.

Fair enough. What I can propose in this case is to have in PM_OPP a
helper called 'dev_pm_opp_of_register_em()' or something like this. This
function will check all prerequisites are present (we have the right
values in DT, and so on) and then call (or not) em_register_perf_domain().
Then we can make the CPUFreq drivers use that instead of calling
em_register_perf_domain() directly.

That should be fine.

That would also make it easy to implement Matthias' suggestion to not
call em_register_perf_domain() if an EM is already present.

So you will track registration state within the OPP core for that ?
Sorry but that doesn't sound right. What's wrong with having an
unregister helper in energy-model to keep proper code flow everywhere
?

-- 
viresh

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel