Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1226715 > unrolled thread

[PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi

Started byPengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
First post2015-09-17 09:40 +0200
Last post2015-09-22 05:20 +0200
Articles 6 — 3 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  [PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com> - 2015-09-17 09:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2015-09-18 01:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> - 2015-09-18 17:50 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com> - 2015-09-21 06:00 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> - 2015-09-21 23:40 +0200
            Re: [PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com> - 2015-09-22 05:20 +0200

#1226715 — [PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi

FromPengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
Date2015-09-17 09:40 +0200
Subject[PATCH] powercap / RAPL : remove dependency on iosf_mbi
Message-ID<q9BXr-55Q-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
iosf_mbi is supported on Quark, Braswell, Baytrail and some Atom SoC,
but RAPL is not limited to these SoC, it supports almost Intel CPUs.
Remove this dependece to make RAPL support more Intel CPUs.

Please select IOSF_MBI on Atom SoCs.

Signed-off-by: Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
---
 drivers/powercap/Kconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
index 85727ef..a7c81b5 100644
--- a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ if POWERCAP
 # Client driver configurations go here.
 config INTEL_RAPL
 	tristate "Intel RAPL Support"
-	depends on X86 && IOSF_MBI
+	depends on X86
 	default n
 	---help---
 	  This enables support for the Intel Running Average Power Limit (RAPL)
-- 
2.4.3

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1227485

From"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Date2015-09-18 01:50 +0200
Message-ID<q9R69-2bw-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1226715
On Thursday, September 17, 2015 03:31:41 PM Pengyu Ma wrote:
> iosf_mbi is supported on Quark, Braswell, Baytrail and some Atom SoC,
> but RAPL is not limited to these SoC, it supports almost Intel CPUs.
> Remove this dependece to make RAPL support more Intel CPUs.
> 
> Please select IOSF_MBI on Atom SoCs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>

Jacob?

> ---
>  drivers/powercap/Kconfig | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> index 85727ef..a7c81b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ if POWERCAP
>  # Client driver configurations go here.
>  config INTEL_RAPL
>  	tristate "Intel RAPL Support"
> -	depends on X86 && IOSF_MBI
> +	depends on X86
>  	default n
>  	---help---
>  	  This enables support for the Intel Running Average Power Limit (RAPL)
> 

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1228082

FromJacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Date2015-09-18 17:50 +0200
Message-ID<qa65c-6Ux-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1227485
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 02:09:55 +0200
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:

> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 03:31:41 PM Pengyu Ma wrote:
> > iosf_mbi is supported on Quark, Braswell, Baytrail and some Atom
> > SoC, but RAPL is not limited to these SoC, it supports almost Intel
> > CPUs. Remove this dependece to make RAPL support more Intel CPUs.
> > 
> > Please select IOSF_MBI on Atom SoCs.
> > 
Unlike Quark, I don't think we want to or do differentiate Atom from
other x86 at compile time. IOSF driver can be compiled as a module also,
therefore RAPL driver needs this explicit dependency at compile time.

> > Signed-off-by: Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
> 
> Jacob?
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/powercap/Kconfig | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> > index 85727ef..a7c81b5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ if POWERCAP
> >  # Client driver configurations go here.
> >  config INTEL_RAPL
> >  	tristate "Intel RAPL Support"
> > -	depends on X86 && IOSF_MBI
> > +	depends on X86
> >  	default n
> >  	---help---
> >  	  This enables support for the Intel Running Average Power
> > Limit (RAPL)
> > 
> 

[Jacob Pan]
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1229008

FromPengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
Date2015-09-21 06:00 +0200
Message-ID<qb0qJ-3sD-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1228082

On 09/18/2015 11:43 PM, Jacob Pan wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 02:09:55 +0200
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 03:31:41 PM Pengyu Ma wrote:
>>> iosf_mbi is supported on Quark, Braswell, Baytrail and some Atom
>>> SoC, but RAPL is not limited to these SoC, it supports almost Intel
>>> CPUs. Remove this dependece to make RAPL support more Intel CPUs.
>>>
>>> Please select IOSF_MBI on Atom SoCs.
>>>
> Unlike Quark, I don't think we want to or do differentiate Atom from
> other x86 at compile time. IOSF driver can be compiled as a module also,
> therefore RAPL driver needs this explicit dependency at compile time.
As commit had exported iosf_mbi to let user use it.

commit aa8e4f22ab7773352ba3895597189b8097f2c307
Author: David E. Box <david.e.box@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed Aug 27 14:40:39 2014 -0700

     x86/iosf: Add Kconfig prompt for IOSF_MBI selection


While selecting IOSF_MBI is preferred, it does mean carrying extra code 
on non-SoC architectures.

We can NOT force user to build in iosf_mbi if they want use RAPL on 
haswell/broadwell/skylake.
And RAPL can be compiled and worked well on haswell/broadwell/skylake 
without IOSF_MBI.
RAPL is really NOT depended on IOSF_MBI.

Pengyu
>>> Signed-off-by: Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
>> Jacob?
>>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/powercap/Kconfig | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>> index 85727ef..a7c81b5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ if POWERCAP
>>>   # Client driver configurations go here.
>>>   config INTEL_RAPL
>>>   	tristate "Intel RAPL Support"
>>> -	depends on X86 && IOSF_MBI
>>> +	depends on X86
>>>   	default n
>>>   	---help---
>>>   	  This enables support for the Intel Running Average Power
>>> Limit (RAPL)
>>>
> [Jacob Pan]

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1229768

FromJacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Date2015-09-21 23:40 +0200
Message-ID<qbgYy-1Xv-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1229008
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:48:14 +0800
Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 09/18/2015 11:43 PM, Jacob Pan wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 02:09:55 +0200
> > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 03:31:41 PM Pengyu Ma wrote:
> >>> iosf_mbi is supported on Quark, Braswell, Baytrail and some Atom
> >>> SoC, but RAPL is not limited to these SoC, it supports almost
> >>> Intel CPUs. Remove this dependece to make RAPL support more Intel
> >>> CPUs.
> >>>
> >>> Please select IOSF_MBI on Atom SoCs.
> >>>
> > Unlike Quark, I don't think we want to or do differentiate Atom from
> > other x86 at compile time. IOSF driver can be compiled as a module
> > also, therefore RAPL driver needs this explicit dependency at
> > compile time.
> As commit had exported iosf_mbi to let user use it.
> 
> commit aa8e4f22ab7773352ba3895597189b8097f2c307
> Author: David E. Box <david.e.box@linux.intel.com>
> Date:   Wed Aug 27 14:40:39 2014 -0700
> 
>      x86/iosf: Add Kconfig prompt for IOSF_MBI selection
> 
> 
> While selecting IOSF_MBI is preferred, it does mean carrying extra
> code on non-SoC architectures.
> 
> We can NOT force user to build in iosf_mbi if they want use RAPL on 
> haswell/broadwell/skylake.
> And RAPL can be compiled and worked well on haswell/broadwell/skylake 
> without IOSF_MBI.
> RAPL is really NOT depended on IOSF_MBI.
> 
True for haswell/broadwell/skylake platforms. But if we want binary
compatibility for Atom and Core, I can' see how simply removing the
dependency would work, unless we have runtime detection of IOSF.

> Pengyu
> >>> Signed-off-by: Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
> >> Jacob?
> >>
> >>> ---
> >>>   drivers/powercap/Kconfig | 2 +-
> >>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> >>> index 85727ef..a7c81b5 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> >>> +++ b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> >>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ if POWERCAP
> >>>   # Client driver configurations go here.
> >>>   config INTEL_RAPL
> >>>   	tristate "Intel RAPL Support"
> >>> -	depends on X86 && IOSF_MBI
> >>> +	depends on X86
> >>>   	default n
> >>>   	---help---
> >>>   	  This enables support for the Intel Running Average
> >>> Power Limit (RAPL)
> >>>
> > [Jacob Pan]
> 

[Jacob Pan]
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1229890

FromPengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
Date2015-09-22 05:20 +0200
Message-ID<qbmhz-1kU-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1229768

On 09/22/2015 05:36 AM, Jacob Pan wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:48:14 +0800
> Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 09/18/2015 11:43 PM, Jacob Pan wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 02:09:55 +0200
>>> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thursday, September 17, 2015 03:31:41 PM Pengyu Ma wrote:
>>>>> iosf_mbi is supported on Quark, Braswell, Baytrail and some Atom
>>>>> SoC, but RAPL is not limited to these SoC, it supports almost
>>>>> Intel CPUs. Remove this dependece to make RAPL support more Intel
>>>>> CPUs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please select IOSF_MBI on Atom SoCs.
>>>>>
>>> Unlike Quark, I don't think we want to or do differentiate Atom from
>>> other x86 at compile time. IOSF driver can be compiled as a module
>>> also, therefore RAPL driver needs this explicit dependency at
>>> compile time.
>> As commit had exported iosf_mbi to let user use it.
>>
>> commit aa8e4f22ab7773352ba3895597189b8097f2c307
>> Author: David E. Box <david.e.box@linux.intel.com>
>> Date:   Wed Aug 27 14:40:39 2014 -0700
>>
>>       x86/iosf: Add Kconfig prompt for IOSF_MBI selection
>>
>>
>> While selecting IOSF_MBI is preferred, it does mean carrying extra
>> code on non-SoC architectures.
>>
>> We can NOT force user to build in iosf_mbi if they want use RAPL on
>> haswell/broadwell/skylake.
>> And RAPL can be compiled and worked well on haswell/broadwell/skylake
>> without IOSF_MBI.
>> RAPL is really NOT depended on IOSF_MBI.
>>
> True for haswell/broadwell/skylake platforms. But if we want binary
> compatibility for Atom and Core, I can' see how simply removing the
> dependency would work, unless we have runtime detection of IOSF.
If you want use iosf_mbi on atom, please select it on generic x86 config.
But not force it depend on another feature that not related on it with 
other boards.
I don't care how iosf_mbi is added to kernel config, but why should I be 
forced to add it if I want use RAPL?
It doesn't make any sense.

Pengyu

>
>> Pengyu
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pengyu Ma <pengyu.ma@windriver.com>
>>>> Jacob?
>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    drivers/powercap/Kconfig | 2 +-
>>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>>>> index 85727ef..a7c81b5 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
>>>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ if POWERCAP
>>>>>    # Client driver configurations go here.
>>>>>    config INTEL_RAPL
>>>>>    	tristate "Intel RAPL Support"
>>>>> -	depends on X86 && IOSF_MBI
>>>>> +	depends on X86
>>>>>    	default n
>>>>>    	---help---
>>>>>    	  This enables support for the Intel Running Average
>>>>> Power Limit (RAPL)
>>>>>
>>> [Jacob Pan]
> [Jacob Pan]

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web