Hi all,

This is a patch set which changes Energy Model power values scale to
micro-Watts. It also upgrades the SCMI performance layer + scmi-cpufreq
driver to leverage the SCMI v3.1 spec and process micro-Watts power values
coming from FW. The higher precision in EM power field solves an issue
of a rounding error, which then can be misinterpreted as 'inefficient OPP'.
An example rounding issue calculation is present in patch 1/4 description.

Regards,
Lukasz Luba

Lukasz Luba (4):
  PM: EM: convert power field to micro-Watts precision and align drivers
  Documentation: EM: Switch to micro-Watts scale
  firmware: arm_scmi: Get detailed power scale from perf
  cpufreq: scmi: Support the power scale in micro-Watts in SCMI v3.1

 Documentation/power/energy-model.rst  | 14 +++---
 drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq-hw.c |  7 +--
 drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c        | 15 ++++++-
 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c      | 18 +++++---
 drivers/opp/of.c                      | 15 ++++---
 drivers/powercap/dtpm_cpu.c           |  5 +--
 drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c     | 13 +++++-
 drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c     | 19 ++++++--
 include/linux/energy_model.h          | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
 include/linux/scmi_protocol.h         |  8 +++-
 kernel/power/energy_model.c           | 31 ++++++++-----
 11 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.1

Hi guys,

Are there any objections to these patches?


On 6/22/22 15:57, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This is a patch set which changes Energy Model power values scale to
> micro-Watts. It also upgrades the SCMI performance layer + scmi-cpufreq
> driver to leverage the SCMI v3.1 spec and process micro-Watts power values
> coming from FW. The higher precision in EM power field solves an issue
> of a rounding error, which then can be misinterpreted as 'inefficient OPP'.
> An example rounding issue calculation is present in patch 1/4 description.
> 
> Regards,
> Lukasz Luba
> 
> Lukasz Luba (4):
>    PM: EM: convert power field to micro-Watts precision and align drivers
>    Documentation: EM: Switch to micro-Watts scale
>    firmware: arm_scmi: Get detailed power scale from perf
>    cpufreq: scmi: Support the power scale in micro-Watts in SCMI v3.1
> 
>   Documentation/power/energy-model.rst  | 14 +++---
>   drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq-hw.c |  7 +--
>   drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c        | 15 ++++++-
>   drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c      | 18 +++++---
>   drivers/opp/of.c                      | 15 ++++---
>   drivers/powercap/dtpm_cpu.c           |  5 +--
>   drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c     | 13 +++++-
>   drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c     | 19 ++++++--
>   include/linux/energy_model.h          | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
>   include/linux/scmi_protocol.h         |  8 +++-
>   kernel/power/energy_model.c           | 31 ++++++++-----
>   11 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
> 


I would like to move forward with the micro-Watts in
the Energy Model. We have feedback from our partners
that this is a limitation. Also, as you can see
this uW is part of the new SCMI spec, which we
have support on our roadmap.

Regards,
Lukasz

On 29-06-22, 10:49, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> I would like to move forward with the micro-Watts in
> the Energy Model. We have feedback from our partners
> that this is a limitation. Also, as you can see
> this uW is part of the new SCMI spec, which we
> have support on our roadmap.

Should I pick them and merge via PM tree ?

-- 
viresh

Hi Viresh,

On 6/29/22 10:53, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 29-06-22, 10:49, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>> I would like to move forward with the micro-Watts in
>> the Energy Model. We have feedback from our partners
>> that this is a limitation. Also, as you can see
>> this uW is part of the new SCMI spec, which we
>> have support on our roadmap.
> 
> Should I pick them and merge via PM tree ?
> 

Thanks for fast response. It would be great.

I have 2 ACKs from Sudeep for the SCMI part,
but I don't know the status e.g. of DTPM
current work which is using the EM milli-Watts
and does conversion to uW internally.
I hope, I won't make issues to Daniel's work with this
change.

On 29-06-22, 11:00, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> Thanks for fast response. It would be great.
> 
> I have 2 ACKs from Sudeep for the SCMI part,
> but I don't know the status e.g. of DTPM
> current work which is using the EM milli-Watts
> and does conversion to uW internally.
> I hope, I won't make issues to Daniel's work with this
> change.

Daniel, do you have any objections to this ?

-- 
viresh

Hi Lukasz,

On 29/06/2022 12:01, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 29-06-22, 11:00, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>> Thanks for fast response. It would be great.
>>
>> I have 2 ACKs from Sudeep for the SCMI part,
>> but I don't know the status e.g. of DTPM
>> current work which is using the EM milli-Watts
>> and does conversion to uW internally.
>> I hope, I won't make issues to Daniel's work with this
>> change.
> 
> Daniel, do you have any objections to this ?

Sorry I had no time to review the series yet, give me a couple of days, 
may be a bit more if possible


-- 
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Hi Daniel,

On 6/29/22 11:21, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> 
> Hi Lukasz,
> 
> On 29/06/2022 12:01, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 29-06-22, 11:00, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>> Thanks for fast response. It would be great.
>>>
>>> I have 2 ACKs from Sudeep for the SCMI part,
>>> but I don't know the status e.g. of DTPM
>>> current work which is using the EM milli-Watts
>>> and does conversion to uW internally.
>>> I hope, I won't make issues to Daniel's work with this
>>> change.
>>
>> Daniel, do you have any objections to this ?
> 
> Sorry I had no time to review the series yet, give me a couple of days, 
> may be a bit more if possible
> 
> 

OK, take your time. I hope this could land as a material
for v5.20, we still have some time.

Regards,
Lukasz