Re: [PATCH 1/3] cpufreq: Add a callback to update the min_freq_req from drivers
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Mon Oct 07 2024 - 11:49:05 EST
On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 5:46 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 6:40 AM Dhananjay Ugwekar
> <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Rafael,
> >
> > On 10/4/2024 11:47 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 10:44 AM Dhananjay Ugwekar
> > > <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Currently, there is no proper way to update the initial lower frequency
> > >> limit from cpufreq drivers.
> > >
> > > Why do you want to do it?
> >
> > We want to set the initial lower frequency limit at a more efficient level
> > (lowest_nonlinear_freq) than the lowest frequency, which helps save power in
> > some idle scenarios, and also improves benchmark results in some scenarios.
> > At the same time, we want to allow the user to set the lower limit back to
> > the inefficient lowest frequency.
>
> So you want the default value of scaling_min_freq to be greater than
> the total floor.
>
> I have to say that I'm not particularly fond of this approach because
> it is adding a new meaning to scaling_min_freq: Setting it below the
> default would not cause the driver to use inefficient frequencies
s/not/now/ (sorry)
I should have double checked this before sending.
> which user space may not be aware of. Moreover, it would tell the
> driver how far it could go with that.
>
> IMV it would be bettwr to have a separate interface for this kind of tuning.