mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	<rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 11:11:36 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5600C6E8.50602@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150921143629.4f597e1c@icelake>



On 09/22/2015 05:36 AM, Jacob Pan wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:48:14 +0800
> Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 09/18/2015 11:43 PM, Jacob Pan wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 02:09:55 +0200
>>> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 03:31:41 PM Pengyu Ma wrote:
>>>>> iosf_mbi is supported on Quark, Braswell, Baytrail and some Atom
>>>>> SoC, but RAPL is not limited to these SoC, it supports almost
>>>>> Intel CPUs. Remove this dependece to make RAPL support more Intel
>>>>> CPUs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please select IOSF_MBI on Atom SoCs.
>>>>>
>>> Unlike Quark, I don't think we want to or do differentiate Atom from
>>> other x86 at compile time. IOSF driver can be compiled as a module
>>> also, therefore RAPL driver needs this explicit dependency at
>>> compile time.
>> As commit had exported iosf_mbi to let user use it.
>>
>> commit aa8e4f22ab7773352ba3895597189b8097f2c307
>> Author: David E. Box <david.e.box@linux.intel.com>
>> Date:   Wed Aug 27 14:40:39 2014 -0700
>>
>>       x86/iosf: Add Kconfig prompt for IOSF_MBI selection
>>
>>
>> While selecting IOSF_MBI is preferred, it does mean carrying extra
>> code on non-SoC architectures.
>>
>> We can NOT force user to build in iosf_mbi if they want use RAPL on
>> haswell/broadwell/skylake.
>> And RAPL can be compiled and worked well on haswell/broadwell/skylake
>> without IOSF_MBI.
>> RAPL is really NOT depended on IOSF_MBI.
>>
> True for haswell/broadwell/skylake platforms. But if we want binary
> compatibility for Atom and Core, I can' see how simply removing the
> dependency would work, unless we have runtime detection of IOSF.
If you want use iosf_mbi on atom, please select it on generic x86 config.
But not force it depend on another feature that not related on it with 
other boards.
I don't care how iosf_mbi is added to kernel config, but why should I be 
forced to add it if I want use RAPL?
It doesn't make any sense.

Pengyu

>
>> Pengyu
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
>>>> Jacob?
>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    drivers/powercap/Kconfig | 2 +-
>>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>>>> index 85727ef..a7c81b5 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ if POWERCAP
>>>>>    # Client driver configurations go here.
>>>>>    config INTEL_RAPL
>>>>>    	tristate "Intel RAPL Support"
>>>>> -	depends on X86 && IOSF_MBI
>>>>> +	depends on X86
>>>>>    	default n
>>>>>    	---help---
>>>>>    	  This enables support for the Intel Running Average
>>>>> Power Limit (RAPL)
>>>>>
>>> [Jacob Pan]
> [Jacob Pan]


  reply	other threads:[~2015-09-22  3:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-17  7:31 Pengyu Ma
2015-09-18  0:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-09-18 15:43   ` Jacob Pan
2015-09-21  3:48     ` Pengyu Ma
2015-09-21 21:36       ` Jacob Pan
2015-09-22  3:11         ` Pengyu Ma [this message]
2015-09-22 17:01           ` Jacob Pan
2015-09-24 10:03             ` Pengyu Ma
2015-09-24 15:09               ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-09-24 16:33               ` Jacob Pan
2015-09-26  3:42                 ` Pengyu Ma
2015-09-28 16:13                   ` Jacob Pan
2015-09-22 13:41         ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-09-22 15:57           ` Jacob Pan
2015-09-22 17:00             ` Austin S Hemmelgarn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5600C6E8.50602@windriver.com \
    --to=pengyu.ma@windriver.com \
    --cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome