From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Klimov Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/5] ACPI/CPPC: set a non-zero value for transition_latency Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 12:01:53 +0100 Message-ID: <20160808110153.GA27382@arm.com> References: <1469562328-10201-1-git-send-email-pprakash@codeaurora.org> <1469562328-10201-5-git-send-email-pprakash@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:35239 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752014AbcHHLCZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2016 07:02:25 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1469562328-10201-5-git-send-email-pprakash@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Prashanth Prakash Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, hotran@apm.com, cov@codeaurora.org On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:45:27PM -0600, Prashanth Prakash wrote: > Compute the expected transition latency for frequency transitions > using the values from the PCCT tables when the desired perf > register is in PCC. > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" > Signed-off-by: Prashanth Prakash Reviewed-by: Alexey Klimov > --- > drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 1 + > include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h | 1 + > 3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c > index 4a887d4..93abaec 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c > @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static void __iomem *pcc_comm_addr; > static int pcc_subspace_idx = -1; > static bool pcc_channel_acquired; > static ktime_t deadline; > -static unsigned int pcc_mpar, pcc_mrtt; > +static unsigned int pcc_mpar, pcc_mrtt, pcc_nominal; > > /* pcc mapped address + header size + offset within PCC subspace */ > #define GET_PCC_VADDR(offs) (pcc_comm_addr + 0x8 + (offs)) > @@ -462,7 +462,6 @@ static int register_pcc_channel(int pcc_subspace_idx) > return -ENODEV; > } > > - > /* > * cppc_ss->latency is just a Nominal value. In reality > * the remote processor could be much slower to reply. > @@ -472,6 +471,7 @@ static int register_pcc_channel(int pcc_subspace_idx)