Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f3d0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id a16csp5420731pxv; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 03:25:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxxqvgyD4BgkrEInGiwUII/fbns10JsOtiPVbZsN9XDsniGzrHhyRLF0jxmy6YlgjXSowSu X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4d41:: with SMTP id b1mr22848669ejv.239.1625653538395; Wed, 07 Jul 2021 03:25:38 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1625653538; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=o6dMKAkkUyx8Wp5VvfJum1XIL28AoB367yKcBasxai/JlAEQi1/735go5kkNebSk85 Nt1gw201GRZy1SlkZIvdlLsA74CzVsPy2Lh+u8eHfl0VTD3yUiViNqM/vODfjPTCzrQE PK4e1GvhpArcnq5gPSFd+FX4WrxUxokJOiX47PMkiNybAUqS6luXfFXPJPs79fj64VgZ Apj/tk3UyFCt7WoRIUg+BKlKIRGycXvQ35nrCYpBCfjKfKFGcAPjmOU+k+ZmNeQMHtTF q90wNEa7pVR5LhTwLR0Vd+pR+a6W0BPfFMDLYUD+1FpLb10DkfLbhROdvBP3LRKubdFn 0/OA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject; bh=pNugfCSqdVzphYAA1998gWuPVOpnpRyxZGxjKNjx+ZI=; b=i2KWTyGXXXVPLziwnB0c+uPdRh75tmiz/DnCqmOS3lHcOUv5q59p7xEltng2toipTD ZaOfjo53uxX1tKkYI43jsPDl1TvVoj7n1PemIf+1lBCFvGpoyWe1aVJlUBttpJkndqPK fgeRgKZZBtWgvKE9Sq7Ge9Hu2RRWcOTcfh0oGpYNw/PigNuGCk8Bh3jdxyDFIiIYX782 YntPO5Oo1MtMrzZKFbjijYBPhglt9AtKq/Y5BtJf+n7C3AjTQfNHAtorn0Z9MCbJvUsB sJ315gzBJT4+Ibvjmtdck2+rZnJIaYlDQH7H/7PO9uufKe0G+wOjrpiS8SEnS1ki/xU4 rC2Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id cb16si13102273edb.68.2021.07.07.03.25.15; Wed, 07 Jul 2021 03:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231362AbhGGK0g (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 7 Jul 2021 06:26:36 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:33810 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231153AbhGGK0g (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2021 06:26:36 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D1BB1063; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 03:23:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.57.1.129] (unknown [10.57.1.129]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D39F3F694; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 03:23:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PM: EM: Make em_cpu_energy() able to return bigger values To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris.Redpath@arm.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com, qperret@google.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, segall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, bristot@redhat.com, CCj.Yeh@mediatek.com References: <20210625152603.25960-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <20210625152603.25960-3-lukasz.luba@arm.com> From: Lukasz Luba Message-ID: Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 11:23:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 7/7/21 11:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 09:09:08AM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> For now we would live with this simple code which improves >> all recent 64bit platforms and is easy to take it into Android >> common kernel. The next step would be more scattered across >> other subsystems, so harder to backport to Android 5.4 and others. > > Ah, you *do* only care about 64bit :-) So one option is to only increase > precision for 64BIT builds, just like we do for scale_load() and > friends. > Your suggestion is potentially a good compromise :-) We could leave the 32bit alone and they would have old code and precision. Thank you for the comments. Let me discuss this internally with my team.