Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-153418-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <780caf10-964c-4a5b-8333-b448e9cbab4b@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 15:11:52 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: scmi: Update Energy Model with allowed
 performance limits
Content-Language: en-US
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com,
 cristian.marussi@arm.com, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
 rafael@kernel.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, quic_sibis@quicinc.com
References: <20240403162315.1458337-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com>
 <20240403162315.1458337-3-lukasz.luba@arm.com>
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240403162315.1458337-3-lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 03/04/2024 18:23, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> The Energy Model (EM) supports performance limits updates. Use the SCMI
> notifications to get information from FW about allowed frequency scope for
> the CPUs.

I'm slightly confused here. IMHO this doesn't seem to be related to the
"HW dependency between 'little CPUs & L3 $ in DSU' or similar" usecase.

I assumed that this usecase is rather handled via an additional
out-of-tree driver, potentially the same which updates the EM because of
temperature change (em_dev_compute_costs(), em_dev_update_perf_domain())
or chip binning (em_dev_update_chip_binning()).

What about other CPUFreq drivers registering an EM via
em_dev_register_perf_domain() or 'cpufreq_register_em_with_opp() ->
dev_pm_opp_of_register_em()'? Or is this 'limit notification' an SCMI FW
only thing?

[...]