From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] cpufreq: OMAP: Add SMP support for OMAP4+
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 09:37:12 -0400
Message-ID: <521F4E88.1000709@ti.com>
References: <1316725648-26710-1-git-send-email-khilman@ti.com> <1316725648-26710-3-git-send-email-khilman@ti.com> <CAOh2x=k11EivJoy5-PMXnE5JGDc=DcJKhae7qoh6tNc4L63VnA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <cpufreq-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAOh2x=k11EivJoy5-PMXnE5JGDc=DcJKhae7qoh6tNc4L63VnA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: cpufreq-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <cpufreq.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>, "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" <cpufreq@vger.kernel.org>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>

On Thursday 29 August 2013 06:02 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> wrote:
>> From: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
>>
>> On OMAP SMP configuartion, both processors share the voltage
>> and clock. So both CPUs needs to be scaled together and hence
>> needs software co-ordination.
>>
>> Also, update lpj with reference value to avoid progressive error.
>>
>> Adjust _both_ the per-cpu loops_per_jiffy and global lpj. Calibrate
>> them with with reference to the initial values to avoid a
>> progressively bigger and bigger error in the value over time.
>>
>> While at this, re-use the notifiers for UP/SMP since on UP machine or
>> UP_ON_SMP policy->cpus mask would contain only the boot CPU.
>>
>> Based on initial SMP support by Santosh Shilimkar.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
>> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
>> [khilman@ti.com: due to overlap/rework, combined original Santosh patch
>>                  and Russell's rework]
>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c |   80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>  1 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c
> 
>> +       /*
>> +        * On OMAP SMP configuartion, both processors share the voltage
>> +        * and clock. So both CPUs needs to be scaled together and hence
>> +        * needs software co-ordination. Use cpufreq affected_cpus
>> +        * interface to handle this scenario. Additional is_smp() check
>> +        * is to keep SMP_ON_UP build working.
>> +        */
>> +       if (is_smp()) {
>> +               policy->shared_type = CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY;
>> +               cpumask_or(cpumask, cpumask_of(policy->cpu), cpumask);
>> +               cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, cpumask);
>> +       }
> 
> Does somebody remember importance of is_smp() here??
>
Above code was under #ifdef CONFIG_SMP and SMP_ON_UP where config
SMP was enabled as well above steps were not needed.
 
> Current code looks like:
> 
> if (is_smp())
>     cpumask_setall(policy->cpus);
> 
> And I was looking to remove this check if it is no more useful.. And
> so simply do
> 
> cpumask_setall(policy->cpus);
> 
Thats should work I guess. Infact I changed this i downstream kernel
a while back but forgot to send a patch. Just see if for some reason
above can break UP machine since this driver is used on UP machines
as well. Other than that, it should be fine

Regards,
Santosh