Re: [RFC PATCH 2/8] Documentation: arm: define DT cpu capacity bindings

[Catalin Marinas]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 03:57:37PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 03:46:51PM +0000, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > On 15/12/15 15:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 03:08:13PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > My expectation is that we just need good enough, not perfect, and that
> > > > seems to match what Juri is saying about the expectation that most of
> > > > the fine tuning is done via other knobs.
> > > 
> > > My expectation is that if a ballpark figure is good enough, it should be
> > > possible to implement something trivial like bogomips / loop_per_jiffy
> > > calculation.
> > 
> > I didn't really followed that, so I might be wrong here, but isn't
> > already happened a discussion about how we want/like to stop exposing
> > bogomips info or rely on it for anything but in kernel delay loops?
> 
> I meant that we could have a benchmark of that level of complexity,
> rather than those specific values.

Or we could simply let user space use whatever benchmarks or hard-coded
values it wants and set the capacity via sysfs (during boot). By
default, the kernel would assume all CPUs equal.

-- 
Catalin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/