The minutes of the weekly call can be found at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/PowerManagement/Meetings/2010-08-18
Attendees:
Linaro: Amit Kucheria, Amit Arora, Yong Shen ARM: Robin Randhawa
== Agenda == * Review action items from last meeting * Blueprint status * HW governers * Powerdebug - Amit A and Yong to co-operate on the list of info we've noted in the Master Task List against powerdebug * hwmon not much used * camera goes to v4l * battery goes to supply class * omap4 - temperature sensor exported to hwmon * power supply class support to be added
== Action Items from this Meeting == * ACTION: Amit A to test on pm enabled OMAP3 board * ACTION: Amit A to document details on power supply class (battery info) to PowerTOP internal wiki page * ACTION: Yong to look into getting powertop kernel patches applied to Linaro kernel tree * ACTION: Robin to send links to patches sent to linux-pm * ACTION: Amit K to spend some time on usecase to reproduce ondemand governor problems * ACTION: Yong to look at common clock FW, find out if debug info being exported (usage count, clk rate, dependencies)
== Action Items from Previous Meeting == * ACTIVE (Immediate): * ACTION: Robin and Srinivas to target the ftrace patches for upstream.: * Srinivas to clarify what tree/branch is being used for this work: DONE * ARM to sit on patches, perhaps get TI to carry them. * ACTION: Amit A to get review and then post powertop patches to powertop list upstream: DONE * New ACTION: Amit A to test on pm enabled OMAP3 board * ACTION: Amit A to look at power supply framework * New ACTION: Amit A to document details on power supply class (battery info) to PowerTOP internal wiki page * ACTION: Amit K to look at getting powertop kernel patches applied to Linaro kernel tree: Carry forward * New ACTION: Yong to look into this * ACTION: Vishwa to send instrumentation patches to linaro-dev: DONE * ACTION: Vishwa to send usecase to reproduce ondemand governor problems: Tranferred to Amit K * New ACTION: Robin to send link to some interesting patches from linux-pm * ACTION: Amit K to spend some time on usecase to reproduce ondemand governor problems: Carry forward
* ACTIVE (Long Term) : * ACTION: Srinivas to provide details of where he believes userspace - kernel interaction is required. (low prio) * ACTION: Bobby to check on multi-core boards availability (request open) * ACTION: ARM to discuss giving out internal Eclipse based tool (similar to powertop) (no ETA as of now) * ACTION: Amit Kucheria and Vishwa to get inputs from community on the issues related to CPUIDLE governor: POSTPONED until instrumentation work
* DORMANT : * ACTION: ARM to share internal instrumentation flow (BAB: we might also align with Linaro on workload discussions) * Might take couple of months * ACTION: Amit K to talk to jeremy about power domain framework: DONE * Jeremy needs help, will revisit in a few weeks
== Minutes == * Vishwa and Srinivas on holidays * Powerdebug: * Start a wiki page to note findings (amit a) * ACTION: Yong to look at common clock FW, find out if debug info being exported (usage count, clk rate, dependencies) * Add code to powerdebug to read this debug information * 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.
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?
- 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?
- 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.
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
- ACTION: ARM to discuss giving out internal Eclipse based tool (similar to powertop) (no ETA as of now)
The tool is an Eclipse-based generic event viewer. Internally, we're displaying 'power events,' such as those that Srinivas' recent ftrace patches around cpufreq/cpuidle. There is no ETA (or commitment) for providing this tool externally at the moment, but it's under discussion.
Is this tool included or based on ARM's DS-5 kit?
I'll let ARM talk about this.
The tool currently has no relation to DS-5, other than it's also Eclipse based..
HTH - let me know if you need more.
-Bobby
-----Original Message----- From: linaro-dev-bounces@lists.linaro.org [mailto:linaro-dev-bounces@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Amit Kucheria Sent: 20 August 2010 08:11 To: Christian Robottom Reis Cc: Srinivas Kalaga; linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [PM] 18/08/10 - Minutes for the Power Management WG weekly call
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 commonamongst 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 allowsall 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
linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
Greetings.
-----Original Message----- From: Amit Kucheria [mailto:amit.kucheria@linaro.org]
[...]
- ACTION: Robin to send links to patches sent to linux-pm
Amit, this URL points to the discussion I was referring to. It turns out that it's the cpufreq list and it's a sort of RFC really, no patches.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/cpufreq/msg01737.html
I think I see Dave J's point and it makes sense but there's nothing conclusive in the thread.
Cheers, Robin
-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
-
Amit Kucheria -
Bobby Batacharia -
Christian Robottom Reis -
Robin Randhawa