Re: [PATCH v7 00/23] Introduce runtime modifiable Energy Model

[Lukasz Luba]

Hi Dietmar,

On 1/29/24 18:16, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 17/01/2024 10:56, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Changelog:
> > v7:
> > - dropped em_table_get/put() (Rafael)
> > - renamed memory function to em_table_alloc/free() (Rafael)
> > - use explicit rcu_read_lock/unlock() instead of wrappers and aligned
> >    frameworks & drivers using EM (Rafael)
> > - adjusted documentation to the new functions
> > - fixed doxygen comments (Rafael)
> > - renamed 'refcount' to 'kref' (Rafael)
> > - changed patch headers according to comments (Rafael)
> > - rebased on 'next-20240112' to get Ingo's revert affecting energy_model.h
> > v6 [6]:
> > - renamed 'runtime_table' to 'em_table' (Dietmar, Rafael)
> > - dropped kref increment during allocation (Qais)
> > - renamed em_inc/dec_usage() to em_table_inc/dec() (Qais)
> > - fixed comment description and left old comment block with small
> >    adjustment in em_cpu_energy() patch 15/23 (Dietmar)
> > - added platform name which was used for speed-up testing (Dietmar)
> > - changed patch header description keep it small not repeating the in-code
> >    comment describing 'cost' in em_cpu_energy() patch 15/23 (Dietmar)
> > - added check and warning in em_cpu_energy() about RCU lock held (Qais, Xuewen)
> > - changed nr_perf_states usage in the patch 7/23 (Dietmar)
> > - changed documentation according to comments (Dietmar)
> > - changed in-code comment in patch 11/23 according to comments (Dietmar)
> > - changed example driver function 'ctx' argument in the documentation (Xuewen)
> > - changed the example driver in documentation, dropped module_exit and
> >    added em_free_table() explicit in the update function
> > - fixed comments in various patch headers (Dietmar)
> > - fixed Doxygen comment s/@state/@table patch 4/23 (Dietmar)
> > - added information in the cover letter about:
> > -- optimization in EAS hot code path
> > -- follow-up patch set which adds OPP support and modifies EM for Exynos5
> > - rebased on 'next-20240104' to avoid collision with other code touching
> >    em_cpu_energy()
>
> LGTM now. I see that my comments from v5 have been addressed. Minor
> points which still exists for me I commented on in the individual patches.
>
> For the whole series:
>
> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx>
>
> (with a simple test driver updating the EM for CPU0 on Arm64 Juno-r0)

Thank you for the review and testing!

I'll probably have to re-base the v7 on top of some current PM
branch.

Regards,
Lukasz