Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] arm64: use activity monitors for frequency invariance | From | Lukasz Luba <> | Date | Tue, 25 Feb 2020 09:59:20 +0000 |
| |
On 2/24/20 6:40 PM, Valentin Schneider wrote: > > Ionela Voinescu writes: > >> Signed-off-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> >> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> >> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> >> Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> > > With the small nits below: > > Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> > >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c >> index fa9528dfd0ce..7606cbd63517 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c >> + >> +static inline int > > That should be bool, seeing what it returns. > >> +enable_policy_freq_counters(int cpu, cpumask_var_t valid_cpus) >> +{ >> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); >> + >> + if (!policy) { >> + pr_debug("CPU%d: No cpufreq policy found.\n", cpu); >> + return false; >> + } >> + >> + if (cpumask_subset(policy->related_cpus, valid_cpus)) >> + cpumask_or(amu_fie_cpus, policy->related_cpus, >> + amu_fie_cpus); >> + >> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); >> + >> + return true; >> +} >> diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c >> index 1eb81f113786..1ab2b7503d63 100644 >> --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c >> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c >> @@ -29,6 +29,14 @@ void arch_set_freq_scale(struct cpumask *cpus, unsigned long cur_freq, >> unsigned long scale; >> int i; >> >> + /* >> + * If the use of counters for FIE is enabled, just return as we don't >> + * want to update the scale factor with information from CPUFREQ. >> + * Instead the scale factor will be updated from arch_scale_freq_tick. >> + */ >> + if (arch_cpu_freq_counters(cpus)) >> + return; >> + >> scale = (cur_freq << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT) / max_freq; >> >> for_each_cpu(i, cpus) >> diff --git a/include/linux/topology.h b/include/linux/topology.h >> index eb2fe6edd73c..397aad6ae163 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/topology.h >> +++ b/include/linux/topology.h >> @@ -227,5 +227,12 @@ static inline const struct cpumask *cpu_cpu_mask(int cpu) >> return cpumask_of_node(cpu_to_node(cpu)); >> } >> >> +#ifndef arch_cpu_freq_counters >> +static __always_inline >> +bool arch_cpu_freq_counters(struct cpumask *cpus) >> +{ >> + return false; >> +} >> +#endif >> > > Apologies for commenting on this only now, I had missed it in my earlier > round of review. > > I would've liked to keep this contained within arm64 stuff until we agreed > on a more generic counter-driven FIE interface, but seems like we can't evade > it due to the arch_topology situation. > > Would it make sense to relocate this stub to arch_topology.h instead, at > least for the time being? That way the only non-arm64 changes are condensed > in arch_topology (even if it doesn't change much in terms of header files, > since topology.h imports arch_topology.h)
Or make it as a 'weak' and place it just above the arch_set_freq_scale() in arch_topology.c, not touching headers?
| |