[PATCH v4 1/6] Documentation: arm: define DT idle states bindings
sebcape at gmail.com
Wed Jun 18 11:20:11 PDT 2014
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi
<lorenzo.pieralisi at arm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 06:33:35PM +0100, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Jun 2014, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 07:15:16PM +0100, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>> > >
>> > > ...__[EXEC]__|__[PREP]--|__[ENTRY]__|__[IDLE]__|___[EXIT]_--|__[EXEC]__...
>> > > | | | | |
>> > > |<-- entry-latency --->|
>> > > |<- exit- ->|
>> > > | latency |
>> > > |<-------------- min-residency --------------->|
>> > > |<----- worst_wakeup_latency ------>|
>> > >
>> > > entry-latency: Worst case latency required to enter the idle state. The
>> > > exit_latency may be guaranteed only after entry-latency has passed.
>> > >
>> > > min-residency: Minimum period, including preparation, entry and exit,
>> > > for a given power mode to be worthwhile energy wise. It must be at
>> > > least equal to entry_latency + exit_latency.
> Ok, a minor tweak to the diagram above, min-residency should include
> energy costs related to idle entry and exit, but not the exit-latency
> itself, as long as the energy costs implied by exiting the state are
> factored out in the min-residency-us property.
This makes sense to me..
It includes accounting for the energy cost vs WFI of prep/entry/exit,
but timing is from the end of the previous exec, until the event is
expected to trigger.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel