Hi Lukasz,
On 22/02/2022 19:31, Lukasz Luba wrote:
On 2/22/22 18:12, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
Hi Lukasz,
I don't think it makes sense to remove the support of the energy model if the units are abstracts.
IIUC, regarding your previous answer, we don't really know what will do the SoC vendor with these numbers and likely they will provide consistent abstract values which won't prevent a correct behavior.
What would be the benefit of giving inconsistent abstract values which will be unusable except of giving a broken energy model?
The power values in the EM which has abstract scale, would make sense to EAS, but not for IPA or DTPM. Those platforms which want to enable EAS,
but don't need IPA, would register such '<a_good_name_here>' EM.
Sorry, but I don't understand why DTPM can not deal with abstract values?
Your proposed changes would be acceptable if the energy model has a broken flag IMO
That is doable. I can add that flag, so we can call it 'artificial' EM
(when this new flag is set).
It is too soon IMO, I would like to see the numbers first so we can take an enlighten decision. Right now, it is unclear what the numbers will be.