Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 May 2020 13:23:09 +0530 | From | Viresh Kumar <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] cpufreq: Add SW BOOST support for drivers without frequency table |
| |
Sorry for the delay from my side in replying to this thread.
On 15-05-20, 09:49, Xiongfeng Wang wrote: > On 2020/5/14 22:16, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday, May 8, 2020 11:11:03 AM CEST Xiongfeng Wang wrote: > >> Software-managed BOOST get the boost frequency by check the flag > >> CPUFREQ_BOOST_FREQ at driver's frequency table. But some cpufreq driver > >> don't have frequency table and use other methods to get the frequency > >> range, such CPPC cpufreq driver. > >> > >> To add SW BOOST support for drivers without frequency table, we add > >> members in 'cpufreq_policy.cpufreq_cpuinfo' to record the max frequency > >> of boost mode and non-boost mode. The cpufreq driver initialize these two > >> members when probing. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 23 +++++++++++++++-------- > >> include/linux/cpufreq.h | 2 ++ > >> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > >> index 475fb1b..a299426 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > >> @@ -2508,15 +2508,22 @@ static int cpufreq_boost_set_sw(int state) > >> int ret = -EINVAL; > >> > >> for_each_active_policy(policy) { > >> - if (!policy->freq_table) > >> - continue; > >> - > >> - ret = cpufreq_frequency_table_cpuinfo(policy, > >> + if (policy->freq_table) { > >> + ret = cpufreq_frequency_table_cpuinfo(policy, > >> policy->freq_table); > >> - if (ret) { > >> - pr_err("%s: Policy frequency update failed\n", > >> - __func__); > >> - break; > >> + if (ret) { > >> + pr_err("%s: Policy frequency update failed\n", > >> + __func__); > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + } else if (policy->cpuinfo.boost_max_freq) { > >> + if (state) > >> + policy->max = policy->cpuinfo.boost_max_freq; > >> + else > >> + policy->max = policy->cpuinfo.nonboost_max_freq; > >> + policy->cpuinfo.max_freq = policy->max; > >> + } else { > >> + continue; > >> } > > > > Why do you need to update this function? > > My original thought is to reuse the current SW BOOST code as possible, but this > seems to change the cpufreq core too much. > > Thanks for your advice. This is better. I will provide a '->set_boost' callback > for CPPC driver. But I will need to export 'cpufreq_policy_list' and make the > macro 'for_each_active_policy' public.
This can and should be avoided, I will rather move the for-each-policy loop in cpufreq_boost_trigger_state() and call ->set_boost() for each policy and pass policy as argument as well. You would be required to update existing users of sw boost.
-- viresh
| |