Messages in this thread |  | | From | "Yang, Shunyong" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: cppc_cpufreq: Initialize shared cpu's perf capabilities | Date | Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:00:42 +0000 |
| |
Hi, Kumar,
On Mon, 2018-04-02 at 12:38 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 28-03-18, 17:31, Shunyong Yang wrote: > > > > When multiple cpus are related in one cpufreq policy, the first > > online > > cpu will be chosen by default to handle cpufreq operations. Let's > > take > > cpu0 and cpu1 as an example. > > > > When cpu0 is offline, policy->cpu will be shifted to cpu1. Cpu1's > > should > > be initialized. Otherwise, perf capabilities are 0s and speed > > change can > > not take effect. > > > > This patch copies perf capabilities of the first online cpu to > > other > > shared cpus when policy shared type is CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY. > > > > Cc: Joey Zheng <yu.zheng@hxt-semitech.com> > > Signed-off-by: Shunyong Yang <shunyong.yang@hxt-semitech.com> > > --- > > > > The original RFC link, > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10299055/. > > > > This patch solves same issue as RFC above. > > > > Patch name is changed as code is too much different with RFC above. > > > > Remove extra init() per Viresh Kumar's comments and only handle > > CPPC CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY case. > > > > --- > > drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 12 +++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > index 8f7b21a4d537..dc625a93a58e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > @@ -164,8 +164,18 @@ static int cppc_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct > > cpufreq_policy *policy) > > policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency = > > cppc_get_transition_latency(cpu_num); > > policy->shared_type = cpu->shared_type; > > > > - if (policy->shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY) > > + if (policy->shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY) { > > + int i; > > + > > cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, cpu->shared_cpu_map); > > + > > + for_each_cpu(i, policy->cpus) { > > + if (i != policy->cpu) > I would rather do: > > if (unlikely(i == policy->cpu)) > continue;
Thanks. Will change in v2.
> > > > + memcpy(&all_cpu_data[i]- > > >perf_caps, > > + &cpu->perf_caps, > > + sizeof(cpu->perf_caps)); > > + } > > + } > > else if (policy->shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ALL) { > It should be: > > } else if (policy->shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ALL) > { >
Thanks. Will change in v2. I ignored this as checkpatch.pl reports nothing here.
Thanks. Shunyong.
> > > > /* Support only SW_ANY for now. */ > > pr_debug("Unsupported CPU co-ord type\n"); > And thanks for making it work this way. >
|  |