On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 2:06 AM Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>
> Another concern about adding trip points later could be the node
> name. We currently have:
>
>
> trips {
> cpu0_alert0: trip0 {
> ...
> };
>
> cpu0_crit: trip1 {
> ...
> };
> };
>
> If we keep increasing enumeration with
On 11-01-19, 11:58, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:16:53AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Just to gain a better understanding: is cpuidle cooling already
> available for arm64 (or is there a patch set)? I came across the
> relatively new idle injecting framework but it seems cu
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 04:47:15PM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:00 AM Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:30:56AM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
> > > of them for mitigatio
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:16:53AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 10-01-19, 10:42, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > Thanks for the pointer, there's always something new to learn!
> >
> > Ok, so the policy CPU and hence the CPU registered as cooling
> > device may vary. I understand that this requires
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:00 AM Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:30:56AM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
> > of them for mitigation in the cooling-map. At the lower trip points we
> > restrict ourselves
On 10-01-19, 10:42, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> Thanks for the pointer, there's always something new to learn!
>
> Ok, so the policy CPU and hence the CPU registered as cooling
> device may vary. I understand that this requires to list all possible
> cooling devices,
I won't say that I changed DT
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:30:56AM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
> of them for mitigation in the cooling-map. At the lower trip points we
> restrict ourselves to throttling only a few OPPs. At higher trip
> temperatures, allow
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:53:59AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 09-01-19, 18:22, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > Hi Amit,
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:30:56AM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
> > > of them for mitigatio
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 5:58 AM Stephen Boyd wrote:
>
> Quoting Amit Kucheria (2019-01-09 16:00:56)
> > Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
>
> Oh? I thought the big and little cpus were in different frequency
> domains and voltage domains. Maybe that's what you
On 09-01-19, 18:22, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> Hi Amit,
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:30:56AM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
> > of them for mitigation in the cooling-map. At the lower trip points we
> > restrict ourselves t
Hi Amit,
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:30:56AM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
> of them for mitigation in the cooling-map. At the lower trip points we
> restrict ourselves to throttling only a few OPPs. At higher trip
> temperatur
Quoting Amit Kucheria (2019-01-09 16:00:56)
> Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
Oh? I thought the big and little cpus were in different frequency
domains and voltage domains. Maybe that's what you're saying here but
I'm misunderstanding. So change the wording
Since the big and little cpus are in the same frequency domain, use all
of them for mitigation in the cooling-map. At the lower trip points we
restrict ourselves to throttling only a few OPPs. At higher trip
temperatures, allow ourselves to be throttled to any extent.
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria
13 matches
Mail list logo
