summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/include/linux/dtpm.h
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2021-10-21powercap/drivers/dtpm: Use container_of instead of a private data fieldDaniel Lezcano
The dtpm framework provides an API to allocate a dtpm node. However when a backend dtpm driver needs to allocate a dtpm node it must define its own structure and store the pointer of this structure in the private field of the dtpm structure. It is more elegant to use the container_of macro and add the dtpm structure inside the dtpm backend specific structure. The code will be able to deal properly with the dtpm structure as a generic entity, making all this even more self-encapsulated. The dtpm_alloc() function does no longer make sense as the dtpm structure will be allocated when allocating the device specific dtpm structure. The dtpm_init() is provided instead. Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210312130411.29833-4-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
2021-10-21powercap/drivers/dtpm: Simplify the dtpm tableDaniel Lezcano
The dtpm table is an array of pointers, that forces the user of the table to define initdata along with the declaration of the table entry. It is more efficient to create an array of dtpm structure, so the declaration of the table entry can be done by initializing the different fields. Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210312130411.29833-3-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
2021-10-21powercap/drivers/dtpm: Encapsulate even more the codeDaniel Lezcano
In order to increase the self-encapsulation of the dtpm generic code, the following changes are adding a power update ops to the dtpm ops. That allows the generic code to call directly the dtpm backend function to update the power values. The power update function does compute the power characteristics when the function is invoked. In the case of the CPUs, the power consumption depends on the number of online CPUs. The online CPUs mask is not up to date at CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN state in the tear down callback. That is the reason why the online / offline are at separate state. As there is already an existing state for DTPM, this one is only moved to the DEAD state, so there is no addition of new state with these changes. The dtpm node is not removed when the cpu is unplugged. That simplifies the code for the next changes and results in a more self-encapsulated code. Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210312130411.29833-1-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
2020-12-22powercap/drivers/dtpm: Add CPU energy model based supportDaniel Lezcano
With the powercap dtpm controller, we are able to plug devices with power limitation features in the tree. The following patch introduces the CPU power limitation based on the energy model and the performance states. The power limitation is done at the performance domain level. If some CPUs are unplugged, the corresponding power will be subtracted from the performance domain total power. It is up to the platform to initialize the dtpm tree and add the CPU. Here is an example to create a simple tree with one root node called "pkg" and the CPU's performance domains. static int dtpm_register_pkg(struct dtpm_descr *descr) { struct dtpm *pkg; int ret; pkg = dtpm_alloc(NULL); if (!pkg) return -ENOMEM; ret = dtpm_register(descr->name, pkg, descr->parent); if (ret) return ret; return dtpm_register_cpu(pkg); } static struct dtpm_descr descr = { .name = "pkg", .init = dtpm_register_pkg, }; DTPM_DECLARE(descr); Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Tested-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2020-12-22powercap/drivers/dtpm: Add API for dynamic thermal power managementDaniel Lezcano
On the embedded world, the complexity of the SoC leads to an increasing number of hotspots which need to be monitored and mitigated as a whole in order to prevent the temperature to go above the normative and legally stated 'skin temperature'. Another aspect is to sustain the performance for a given power budget, for example virtual reality where the user can feel dizziness if the GPU performance is capped while a big CPU is processing something else. Or reduce the battery charging because the dissipated power is too high compared with the power consumed by other devices. The userspace is the most adequate place to dynamically act on the different devices by limiting their power given an application profile: it has the knowledge of the platform. These userspace daemons are in charge of the Dynamic Thermal Power Management (DTPM). Nowadays, the dtpm daemons are abusing the thermal framework as they act on the cooling device state to force a specific and arbitrary state without taking care of the governor decisions. Given the closed loop of some governors that can confuse the logic or directly enter in a decision conflict. As the number of cooling device support is limited today to the CPU and the GPU, the dtpm daemons have little control on the power dissipation of the system. The out of tree solutions are hacking around here and there in the drivers, in the frameworks to have control on the devices. The common solution is to declare them as cooling devices. There is no unification of the power limitation unit, opaque states are used. This patch provides a way to create a hierarchy of constraints using the powercap framework. The devices which are registered as power limit-able devices are represented in this hierarchy as a tree. They are linked together with intermediate nodes which are just there to propagate the constraint to the children. The leaves of the tree are the real devices, the intermediate nodes are virtual, aggregating the children constraints and power characteristics. Each node have a weight on a 2^10 basis, in order to reflect the percentage of power distribution of the children's node. This percentage is used to dispatch the power limit to the children. The weight is computed against the max power of the siblings. This simple approach allows to do a fair distribution of the power limit. Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Tested-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>