20 Aug
2010
20 Aug
'10
7:11 a.m.
On 10 Aug 19, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:35:31PM +0300, Amit Kucheria wrote:
- ACTION: Amit A to document details on power supply class (battery info) to PowerTOP internal wiki page
Is there an internal wiki for PowerTOP, or is this an internal page on the Linaro wiki?
This shouldn't have contained the word 'internal'. Everything is public at https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/PowerManagement/Doc/Powertop
- ACTION: ARM to discuss giving out internal Eclipse based tool (similar to powertop) (no ETA as of now)
Is this tool included or based on ARM's DS-5 kit?
I'll let ARM talk about this.
- Power management differentiation
- Discussion with Robin from ARM about common frameworks
- Robin not convinced about all the consolidation effort, since some of it is seen as competetive differentiator
- Amit K believes Mechanism should be common amongst vendors so that can use common tools and design patterns.
- Policies can be different to allow differentiation
- e.g. have a cpufreq and cpuidle driver allows all vendors to use powertop tool. If current frameworks don't suit the needs, we can work with upstream to extend them.
This is the correct approach; mechanism should be common and provided by the upstream kernel. Policy should be implemented by vendors and deployed in the way which makes most sense for their projects.
Cheers, Amit