From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754140AbeDPKDn (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 06:03:43 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f194.google.com ([209.85.128.194]:43555 "EHLO mail-wr0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752914AbeDPKDj (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 06:03:39 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/tHyfg2m9H1wyzzalI25DZc5CNCcuIbSd5OPcTExWXzfe2vVC2kvMyB5pPU3hL/qzGzrYYhg== Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] thermal/drivers/cpu_cooling: Introduce the cpu idle cooling driver To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Sudeep Holla , edubezval@gmail.com, kevin.wangtao@linaro.org, leo.yan@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, javi.merino@kernel.org, rui.zhang@intel.com, daniel.thompson@linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Amit Daniel Kachhap References: <1522945005-7165-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <1522945005-7165-7-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <3f3b3b7a-3b74-aee2-2fac-f2759babe3f0@arm.com> <939f7943-feec-aaa2-3bd3-59a6618330c0@linaro.org> <20180416073729.GA4244@vireshk-i7> <0a3164f9-4738-e24e-6ed0-2c75024c304c@linaro.org> <20180416093747.GB4244@vireshk-i7> <4abf0d97-d2b8-46ab-3c05-4a11510ac3fe@linaro.org> <20180416095006.GC4244@vireshk-i7> From: Daniel Lezcano Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:03:36 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180416095006.GC4244@vireshk-i7> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 16/04/2018 11:50, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 16-04-18, 11:45, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> Can you elaborate a bit ? I'm not sure to get the point. > > Sure. With your current code on Hikey960 (big/LITTLE), you end up > creating two cooling devices, one for the big cluster and one for > small cluster. Which is the right thing to do, as we also have two > cpufreq cooling devices. > > But with the change Sudeep is referring to, the helper you used to get > cluster id will return 0 (SoC id) for all the 8 CPUs. So your code > will end up creating a single cpuidle cooling device for all the CPUs. > Which would be wrong. Is the semantic of topology_physical_package_id changing ? I don't understand the change Sudeep is referring to. I saw this attempt: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9959977/ >> BTW, Am I asked to change my code to stick to something which is not >> merged ? > > Sudeep looked pretty confident on how the meaning of this routine is > going to change very soon. I will let him respond on what guarantees > we have that it will get merged :) -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog