Hey Amit, I was able to use your code on an i.MX6Q thermal
implementation and it seemed to work pretty well. Thanks for adding
this. A couple of comments below.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Amit Daniel Kachhap
wrote:
> This patch adds support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level
> impl
Hey Amit/Vincent,
It appears that with this implementation the STATE_ACTIVE trip number
used will also be the index of the cool_freq_tab used. If that is
true, then perhaps a common structure would be beneficial that links
each STATE_ACTIVE trip point with its corresponding cooling data.
BR,
Rob
>> I don't like how ACTIVE does not have available notification callbacks
>> like HOT and CRITICAL do. Perhaps I fail to grasp why they aren't there
>> but besides just applying a cooling device, one might want to do something
>> else as well upon hitting these trip points. So that said, it might
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Jean Pihet wrote:
> Rob,
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Now that the core cpuidle driver keeps time and handles irq enabling,
>> remove this functionality. Also, remove irq disabling as all paths to
>> cpuidle_idle_call already call loca
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Colin Cross wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
>>> Make necessary changes to add implement time keepign and irq enabling
>> keeping
>>> in the core cpuidle code. This will allow t
Hello Colin, thanks for the review.
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Colin Cross wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Make necessary changes to add implement time keepign and irq enabling
> keeping
>> in the core cpuidle code. This will allow the remove of these
>> func
Maintainers for drivers/cpuidle, do you have any comments/opinions
about this patch?
Intel cpuidle and acpi cpuidle maintainers, do you have any
comments/opinions about this patch and the changes to your code?
Any other review and comments welcome.
Summary of positive and negatives as I understa
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Colin Cross wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Rob Lee wrote:
>> Maintainers for drivers/cpuidle, do you have any comments/opinions
>> about this patch?
>>
>> Intel cpuidle and acpi cpuidle maintainers, do you have any
>
Adding sh mailing list and sh contributors I missed on the original
submission. SH folks, full patchset submission can be found here:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg161596.html
Best Regards,
Rob
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
> Enable core cpuidle timekeeping an
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Jean Pihet wrote:
> Robert,
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add functionality that is commonly duplicated by various platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c | 37 ++
>
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Jean Pihet wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Use core cpuidle timekeeping and irqen wrapper and remove that
>> handling from this code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpuidle34xx.c | 43
>> +
Hey Mike,
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * cpuidle_enter_wrap - performing timekeeping and irq around enter function
>> + * @dev: pointer to a valid cpuidle_device object
>> + * @drv: pointer to a valid cp
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * cpuidle_enter_wrap - performing timekeeping and irq around enter function
>> + * @dev: pointer to a valid cpuidle_device object
>> + * @drv: pointer to a valid cpuidle_drive
>>> Any reason that this code is in the header? Why not in cpuidle.c?
>>>
>>
>> Not a strong reason. I thought making it an inline would introduce
>> slightly less new execution when adding this code (realizing that
>> there are function calls immediately after, so the only benefit is the
>> redu
>
> I brought this topic up internally and Jon suggested that the 'usage'
> statistics that are reported in sysfs should also reflect failed
> versus successful C-state transitions, which is a great idea. This
> could simply be achieved by renaming the current 'usage' count to
> something like 'tr
>> Sounds reasonable. In some cases it may be helpful to track state
>> demotion as well. Since I'm still a noob and wearing my submission
>> training wheels, I'm trying to minimize things that fall outside of
>> this basic consolidation effort for this patch series. But I added
>> Jon's suggest
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:36 AM, Jean Pihet wrote:
> Rob,
>
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:11 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Enable core cpuidle timekeeping and irq enabling and remove that
>> handling from this code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c | 78
>> +
Hello Deepthi,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:13 AM, Deepthi Dharwar
wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
>
> On 02/29/2012 08:41 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>
>> Make necessary changes to implement time keeping and irq enabling
>> in the core cpuidle code. This will allow the removal of these
>> functionalities from variou
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Jean Pihet wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:11 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Make necessary changes to implement time keeping and irq enabling
>> in the core cpuidle code. This will allow the removal of these
>> functionalities from various platform cpui
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Robert Lee writes:
>
>> Make necessary changes to implement time keeping and irq enabling
>> in the core cpuidle code. This will allow the removal of these
>> functionalities from various platform cpuidle implementations whose
>> timekeepin
Hello Deepthi,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Deepthi Dharwar
wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On 03/01/2012 06:12 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>
>> Make necessary changes to implement time keeping and irq enabling
>> in the core cpuidle code. This will allow the removal of these
>> functionalities from various
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
> This patch series moves various functionality duplicated in platform
> cpuidle drivers to the core cpuidle driver. Also, the platform irq
> disabling was removed as it appears that all calls into
> cpuidle_call_idle will have already called loca
Hello Stephen,
The following changes since commit 192cfd58774b4d17b2fe8bdc77d89c2ef4e0591d:
Linux 3.3-rc6 (2012-03-03 17:08:09 -0800)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.linaro.org/people/rob_lee/linux.git cpuidle_consol_pull
Robert Lee (8):
cpuidle: Add common time keep
action or information on my part.
Thanks,
Rob
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 19:58:23 -0600 Rob Lee wrote:
>>
>> git://git.linaro.org/people/rob_lee/linux.git cpuidle_consol_pull
>>
>> These changes move v
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Robert Lee writes:
>
>> This patch series moves various functionality duplicated in platform
>> cpuidle drivers to the core cpuidle driver. Also, the platform irq
>> disabling was removed as it appears that all calls into
>> cpuid
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Rob Lee wrote:
> Sekhar tested this patch on Davinci last night and found a problem. I
> looked at the code again and found a mindless omission on my part (see
> below). Fix is trivial. I've check all other platforms and confirmed
> this probl
Sekhar tested this patch on Davinci last night and found a problem. I
looked at the code again and found a mindless omission on my part (see
below). Fix is trivial. I've check all other platforms and confirmed
this problem does not exist for those. Will resend a v9 of the
patchset shortly.
On
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:52 AM, Amit Daniel Kachhap
wrote:
> Hi Durgadoss,
>
> Instead of making all the trip-points of a thermal zone writeable we should
> only allow non-critical trip points to be writeable.
>
> Thanks,
> Amit Daniel
>
Agree, or even better, could the writeable attribute be ma
Sorry, I just read Durgadoss last comment. Please ignore mine.
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Rob Lee wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:52 AM, Amit Daniel Kachhap
> wrote:
>> Hi Durgadoss,
>>
>> Instead of making all the trip-points of a thermal zone writeable we
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:43 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 06:50:12PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add common cpuidle init functionality that can be used by various
>> imx platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/Makefile b/arch/arm/pl
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:10 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 06:37:48PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> The imx5_idle() check of the tzic_eanble_wake() return value uses
>> incorrect (inverted) logic causing all attempt to idle to fail.
>>
>
> Does this have influence on current kern
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Christian Robottom Reis
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 08:54:03AM -0500, Rob Lee wrote:
>> >> +void __init imx_cpuidle_set_driver(struct cpuidle_driver *p)
>> >> +{
>> >> + drv = p;
>> >> +}
>> &
>> >> +void __init imx_cpuidle_set_driver(struct cpuidle_driver *p)
>> >> +{
>> >> + drv = p;
>> >> +}
>> >
>> > You like it complicated, eh? Why do you introduce a function which sets
>> > a variable...
>> >
>>
>> This complication is used to deal with the timing of various levels of
>> init c
>>> If I called imx_cpuidle_init directly from imx5 or imx6q init
>>> routines, it would be getting called before the coreinit_call of core
>>> cpuidle causing a failure. There were various other directions to
>>> take and all seemed less desirable than this one.
>>>
>>> One alternative would be t
>> I don't think we need a cpu_is_imx6q(), but having some i.MX6 specific
>> hook at device_initcall time can't be too wrong. Shawn?
>>
> Yep, it works for me.
>
Sascha, Shawn, thanks for the response.
Since device_initcall isn't platform specific, it seems I would still
need a cpu_is_imx6q() func
>> Let me try last time. What about having a late_initcall hook in
>> machine_desc?
>
> Also fine with me.
>
Shall I add Shawn's patch to my imx cpuidle patchset or should the
arch/arm/kernel/setup.c and arch.h changes be submitted separately?
If separately, Shawn, did you want to submit this pat
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 08:54:26AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 09:38:43AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:45:02AM -0500, Rob Lee wrote:
>> > > >&g
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Daniel Lezcano
wrote:
> On 04/25/2012 02:11 PM, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
>>
>> This patch enables core cpuidle timekeeping and irq enabling and
>> remove those redundant parts from the exynos cpuidle drivers
>>
>> CC: Daniel Lezcano
>> CC: Robert Lee
>> Signed-of
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 09:12:40PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add basic imx6q cpuidle driver. For now, only basic WFI state is
>> supported. Deeper idle states will be added in the future.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> arch/arm/m
Shawn,
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 09:12:38PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add common cpuidle init functionality that can be used by various
>> imx platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> arch/arm/plat-mxc/Makefile | 1
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On 2 May 2012 21:59, Rob Lee wrote:
>>>> + ret = cpuidle_register_device(dev);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + pr_err("%s: Failed to register cpu %u\n",
&g
Sascha,
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:27 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 09:12:38PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add common cpuidle init functionality that can be used by various
>> imx platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> +
>> +int __init imx_cpuidle_init(struct cpui
Sascha,
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 09:12:39PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add imx5 cpuidle driver.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> arch/arm/mach-imx/mm-imx5.c | 42
>> +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3
Sascha,
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:02 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 04:16:46PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add imx5 cpuidle driver.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> arch/arm/mach-imx/mm-imx5.c | 42
>> +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3
Hello Uwe,
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Hello Robert,
>
> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 07:24:17PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> A change is needed in the IMX_IO_P2V macro to allow all imx5 platforms
>> to use common definitions when accessing registers of peripherals on
>>
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 09:27:02AM -0500, Rob Lee wrote:
>> Sascha,
>>
>> >
>> > This clk_get should go away here and be moved somewhere to
>> > initialization. Also, if getting this clock fail
Hello Uwe and Sascha,
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
> A change is needed in the IMX_IO_P2V macro to allow all imx5 platforms
> to use common definitions when accessing registers of peripherals on
> the AIPS2 bus.
>
> This change was tested for mapping conflicts using the iop2v
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> Overall this looks ok now, some comments inline.
>
> Sascha
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 09:33:32PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> The imx5 idle code that existed in mm-imx5.c is moved to pm-imx5.c.
>> The imx5_pm_init call is now
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 09:33:33PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add various functionality needed to enable a imx53 low power idle
>> state. This includes adding the imx53 gpc_dvfs clock and making a
>> common imx5_late_init function and initi
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 09:33:34PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add common cpuidle init functionality that can be used by various
>> imx platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee
>> ---
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_IDLE
>> +extern int imx_cpui
Hey Daniel,
Sorry for the late review/response but perhaps this will still be
useful as your cpuidle work is ongoing.
> Most of the caller are in the boot-up code, in device_init or module_init.
> The other ones are doing some specific initialization on the cpuidle_device
> (cpuinit, like acpi) a
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
> Add imx6q cpu thermal management driver using the new cpu cooling
> interface which limits system performance via cpufreq to reduce
> the cpu temperature. Temperature readings are taken using
> the imx6q temperature sensor and this functionalit
Sascha, thanks for the review.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:11 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 02:06:04AM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Add imx6q cpu thermal management driver using the new cpu cooling
>> interface which limits system performance via cpufreq to reduce
>> the cpu temp
Hello Sascha,
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 05:50:23PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> Cleanup up imx5 idle code and enable imx5 low powe idle for imx53.
>>
>> Add common imx cpuidle initialization functionality and add a i.MX5 and
>> i
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:12:51AM -0500, Rob Lee wrote:
>> Sascha, thanks for the review.
>>
>> >> +
>> >> +static struct imx6q_thermal_zone *th_zone;
>> >> +static void __iomem
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Rob Lee wrote:
> Hello Sascha,
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 05:50:23PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>>> Cleanup up imx5 idle code and enable imx5 low powe id
Hey Amit,
I was just re-organizing the imx thermal driver that uses this cpu
cooling interface and noticed a couple of small issues here. If
these suggestions are agreed upon and if it's too late for these
issues be changed with this patchset, I can submit them separately
unless you'd prefer to.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:51 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
> Add imx anatop peripheral thermal driver and use it for imx6q builds.
> This driver hooks into the linux thermal framework which provides a
> sysfs interface for temperature readings and other information and
> a mechanism to shutdown the syste
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:51:55PM -0500, Robert Lee wrote:
>> +static inline int anatop_get_temp(int *temp, struct thermal_zone_device
>> *tzdev)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int n_meas;
>> + unsigned int reg;
>> + struct imx_anatop_tsdat
(Re-send from my Linaro email address this time)
Requesting to add the commits in the attached patch to the October
Linaro release. These commits add a common imx cpuidle driver, some
common cpuidle mach-mx5 code, and the init call for i.MX51 SoCs.
git://git.linaro.org/people/rob_lee/imx_cpuidle
Requesting to add the commits in the attached patch to the October
Linaro release. These commits add a common imx cpuidle driver, some
common cpuidle mach-mx5 code, and the init call for i.MX51 SoCs.
git://git.linaro.org/people/rob_lee/imx_cpuidle.git imx_mx5_mx51
A patch series containing this
Hey Paul,
I'm already working on upstreaming a thermal driver for i.MX6. I'm
currently on hold paused to upstream cpufreq for i.MX6 and do some
cpuidle work but I predict that I'll be ready to submit a first
version sometime next week.
For all things power management related on i.MX(cpufreq, cpu
62 matches
Mail list logo
