On 6 June 2012 12:41, Arnd Bergmann a...@arndb.de wrote:
for i in 2 3 30 31 ; do
sudo flashbench --open-au --open-au-nr=30 --erasesize=$[512 * 1024] \
/dev/mmcblk0 --offset=$[24*1024*1024]
done
The latest version of the code is at
Hi Vincent,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Vincent Guittot
vincent.guit...@linaro.org wrote:
Add infrastructure to be able to modify the cpu_power of each core
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot vincent.guit...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/include/asm/topology.h | 2 ++
Vincent,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Vincent Guittot
vincent.guit...@linaro.org wrote:
Use cpu compatibility field and clock-frequency field of DT to
estimate the capacity of each core of the system
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot vincent.guit...@linaro.org
---
On 13 June 2012 10:50, Jean Pihet jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote:
Hi Vincent,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Vincent Guittot
vincent.guit...@linaro.org wrote:
Add infrastructure to be able to modify the cpu_power of each core
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot vincent.guit...@linaro.org
---
On 13 June 2012 10:59, Jean Pihet jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote:
Vincent,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Vincent Guittot
vincent.guit...@linaro.org wrote:
Use cpu compatibility field and clock-frequency field of DT to
estimate the capacity of each core of the system
Signed-off-by:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Vincent Guittot
vincent.guit...@linaro.org wrote:
On 13 June 2012 10:59, Jean Pihet jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote:
Vincent,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Vincent Guittot
vincent.guit...@linaro.org wrote:
Use cpu compatibility field and clock-frequency
Hi Daniel,
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Daniel Lezcano
daniel.lezc...@linaro.org wrote:
On 06/08/2012 07:33 PM, Deepthi Dharwar wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Hi Deepthi,
On 06/08/2012 09:32 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
We have the state index passed as parameter to the 'enter' function.
Most of the
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 18:14 +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
Various discussions around power-aware scheduling have amplified the
need for the scheduler to have some knowledge of DVFS. This would then
require the scheduler to track 'cpu_power' ( = max power) and perhaps
a new variable
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
Heteregeneous ARM platform uses arch_scale_freq_power function
to reflect the relative capacity of each core
I think I've pointed out before that this breaks x86.. you need a patch
killing at that stuff before this.
Signed-off-by:
Hi Amit, Peter,
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 18:14 +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
Various discussions around power-aware scheduling have amplified the
need for the scheduler to have some knowledge of DVFS. This would then
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
}
smp_wmb();
}
You know what.. we should make checkpatch report an error for memory
barriers that don't have a comment.
I know this isn't added by this patch, but every time I see something
like it I cry a little.
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
+ smp_wmb();
No cookies for Vince!
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
+struct cpu_capacity cpu_capacity[NR_CPUS];
I know ARM isn't likely to suffer from the 4k cpu issue, but is there a
reason to use a NR_CPUS array over a per-cpu variable?
___
linaro-dev mailing
On Wednesday 13 June 2012, Jassi Brar wrote:
On 6 June 2012 12:41, Arnd Bergmann a...@arndb.de wrote:
for i in 2 3 30 31 ; do
sudo flashbench --open-au --open-au-nr=30 --erasesize=$[512 * 1024] \
/dev/mmcblk0 --offset=$[24*1024*1024]
done
The latest version
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
That must really be the worst CONFIG_ name ever..
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On 13 June 2012 14:50, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
Heteregeneous ARM platform uses arch_scale_freq_power function
to reflect the relative capacity of each core
I think I've pointed out before that this breaks x86.. you
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 15:20 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
In v3.4, x86 hasn't got any specific declaration for
arch_scale_freq_power so it would now use the weak
arch_scale_freq_power which calls default_scale_freq_power. Isn't it
enough ?
---
Subject: sched, x86: Remove broken power
On 13 June 2012 14:47, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 18:14 +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
Various discussions around power-aware scheduling have amplified the
need for the scheduler to have some knowledge of DVFS. This would then
require the scheduler to track
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 15:29 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
In fact, there is 2 tracks, one for a power aware scheduler and one
for setting the capacity of each core of a big.LITTLE system. This
patch is for the latter and is not directly link to the power because
the default/performance mode of
On 13 June 2012 15:28, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 15:20 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
In v3.4, x86 hasn't got any specific declaration for
arch_scale_freq_power so it would now use the weak
arch_scale_freq_power which calls default_scale_freq_power. Isn't
Release Dates and Deliveries
ToolchainJune 14
WG/LT'sJune 21
12.06 RC'sJune 25
12.06 ReleaseJune 28
--
David Zinman
Linaro Release Manager | Project Manager
Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
___
On 13 June 2012 15:32, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 15:29 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
In fact, there is 2 tracks, one for a power aware scheduler and one
for setting the capacity of each core of a big.LITTLE system. This
patch is for the latter and is not
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
That must really be the worst CONFIG_ name ever..
Indeed! We must corner Grant to do a s/CONFIG_OF/CONFIG_DEVICE_TREE/
on the whole tree and send the patch to Linus. He
On 13 June 2012 15:07, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
+struct cpu_capacity cpu_capacity[NR_CPUS];
I know ARM isn't likely to suffer from the 4k cpu issue, but is there a
reason to use a NR_CPUS array over a per-cpu
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 16:54 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On 13 June 2012 15:07, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
+struct cpu_capacity cpu_capacity[NR_CPUS];
I know ARM isn't likely to suffer from the 4k cpu issue, but is
On 06/10/2012 05:31 PM, Michael Hope wrote:
There's an interaction between Linaro GCC or FSF GCC 4.7 and Linux
kernels before 3.2 which causes the kernel to halt straight after
showing 'Uncompressing Linux'. The question comes up every couple of
months so I've blogged about it:
Regretfully this summary is very late.
The Linaro 12.05 delivery cycle was fast and furious with Connect Q2.12, end of
quarter and delivery all occurring in the same week.
During this 2012.05 Linaro Connect, much of the effort was focused on:
* ARM big.LITTLE implementation and testing
*
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 02:52:49PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
}
smp_wmb();
}
You know what.. we should make checkpatch report an error for memory
barriers that don't have a comment.
I know this isn't added
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 20:27 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 02:52:49PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
}
smp_wmb();
}
You know what.. we should make checkpatch report an error for memory
On 14 June 2012 04:22, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/10/2012 05:31 PM, Michael Hope wrote:
There's an interaction between Linaro GCC or FSF GCC 4.7 and Linux
kernels before 3.2 which causes the kernel to halt straight after
showing 'Uncompressing Linux'. The question comes up
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 20:27 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
Actually if it was a new line, it would have been reported, at least in
theory:
# check for memory barriers without a comment.
if ($line =~
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:51 PM, David Zinman david.zin...@linaro.org wrote:
Regretfully this summary is very late.
The Linaro 12.05 delivery cycle was fast and furious with Connect Q2.12, end
of
quarter and delivery all occurring in the same week.
During this 2012.05 Linaro Connect, much
On 13 June 2012 21:51, David Zinman wrote:
Regretfully this summary is very late.
The Linaro 12.05 delivery cycle was fast and furious with Connect Q2.12, end
of
quarter and delivery all occurring in the same week.
During this 2012.05 Linaro Connect, much of the effort was focused on:
*
33 matches
Mail list logo
