public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "lihuisong (C)" <lihuisong@huawei.com>
To: Jie Zhan <zhanjie9@hisilicon.com>, <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>,
	<beata.michalska@arm.com>, <wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com>,
	<viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
	<jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>, <wanghuiqiang@huawei.com>,
	<zhenglifeng1@huawei.com>, <yangyicong@huawei.com>,
	<liaochang1@huawei.com>, <zengheng4@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] cppc_cpufreq: Use desired perf if feedback ctrs are 0 or unchanged
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:28:40 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f888bd45-120a-a045-c35c-52ae40ae8a9a@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240919084552.3591400-2-zhanjie9@hisilicon.com>

Hi Jie,

LGTM except for some trivial,
Reviewed-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>


在 2024/9/19 16:45, Jie Zhan 写道:
> The CPPC performance feedback counters could be 0 or unchanged when the
> target cpu is in a low-power idle state, e.g. power-gated or clock-gated.
>
> When the counters are 0, cppc_cpufreq_get_rate() returns 0 KHz, which makes
> cpufreq_online() get a false error and fail to generate a cpufreq policy.
>
> When the counters are unchanged, the existing cppc_perf_from_fbctrs()
> returns a cached desired perf, but some platforms may update the real
> frequency back to the desired perf reg.
>
> For the above cases in cppc_cpufreq_get_rate(), get the latest desired perf
> to reflect the frequency; if failed, return the cached desired perf.
>
> Fixes: 6a4fec4f6d30 ("cpufreq: cppc: cppc_cpufreq_get_rate() returns zero in all error cases.")
> Signed-off-by: Jie Zhan <zhanjie9@hisilicon.com>
> Reviewed-by: Zeng Heng <zengheng4@huawei.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
> ---
>   drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
> index bafa32dd375d..e55192303a9f 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
> @@ -118,6 +118,9 @@ static void cppc_scale_freq_workfn(struct kthread_work *work)
>   
>   	perf = cppc_perf_from_fbctrs(cpu_data, &cppc_fi->prev_perf_fb_ctrs,
>   				     &fb_ctrs);
> +	if (!perf)
> +		return;
> +
>   	cppc_fi->prev_perf_fb_ctrs = fb_ctrs;
>   
>   	perf <<= SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT;
> @@ -726,11 +729,26 @@ static int cppc_perf_from_fbctrs(struct cppc_cpudata *cpu_data,
>   
>   	/* Check to avoid divide-by zero and invalid delivered_perf */
Now this comment can be removed, right?
>   	if (!delta_reference || !delta_delivered)
> -		return cpu_data->perf_ctrls.desired_perf;
> +		return 0;
>   
>   	return (reference_perf * delta_delivered) / delta_reference;
>   }
>   
> +static int cppc_get_perf_ctrs_sample(int cpu,
> +				     struct cppc_perf_fb_ctrs *fb_ctrs_t0,
> +				     struct cppc_perf_fb_ctrs *fb_ctrs_t1)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = cppc_get_perf_ctrs(cpu, fb_ctrs_t0);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	udelay(2); /* 2usec delay between sampling */
> +
> +	return cppc_get_perf_ctrs(cpu, fb_ctrs_t1);
> +}
> +
>   static unsigned int cppc_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpu)
>   {
>   	struct cppc_perf_fb_ctrs fb_ctrs_t0 = {0}, fb_ctrs_t1 = {0};
> @@ -746,18 +764,29 @@ static unsigned int cppc_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpu)
>   
>   	cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>   
> -	ret = cppc_get_perf_ctrs(cpu, &fb_ctrs_t0);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return 0;
> -
> -	udelay(2); /* 2usec delay between sampling */
> -
> -	ret = cppc_get_perf_ctrs(cpu, &fb_ctrs_t1);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return 0;
> +	ret = cppc_get_perf_ctrs_sample(cpu, &fb_ctrs_t0, &fb_ctrs_t1);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		if (ret == -EFAULT)
> +			goto out_invalid_counters;
suggest that add some comments for ret == -EFAULT case.
Because this error code depands on the implementation of cppc_get_perf_ctrs.
If add a new exception case which also return -EFAULT, then this switch 
is unreasonable.
> +		else
> +			return 0;
> +	}
>   
>   	delivered_perf = cppc_perf_from_fbctrs(cpu_data, &fb_ctrs_t0,
>   					       &fb_ctrs_t1);
> +	if (!delivered_perf)
> +		goto out_invalid_counters;
> +
> +	return cppc_perf_to_khz(&cpu_data->perf_caps, delivered_perf);
> +
> +out_invalid_counters:
> +	/*
> +	 * Feedback counters could be unchanged or 0 when a cpu enters a
> +	 * low-power idle state, e.g. clock-gated or power-gated.
> +	 * Get the lastest or cached desired perf for reflecting frequency.
> +	 */
> +	if (cppc_get_desired_perf(cpu, &delivered_perf))
> +		delivered_perf = cpu_data->perf_ctrls.desired_perf;
>   
>   	return cppc_perf_to_khz(&cpu_data->perf_caps, delivered_perf);
>   }

  reply	other threads:[~2024-09-25  9:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-19  8:45 [PATCH v3 0/2] cppc_cpufreq: Rework ->get() error handling when cores are idle Jie Zhan
2024-09-19  8:45 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] cppc_cpufreq: Use desired perf if feedback ctrs are 0 or unchanged Jie Zhan
2024-09-25  9:28   ` lihuisong (C) [this message]
2024-09-26  2:57     ` Jie Zhan
2024-09-26  6:07       ` lihuisong (C)
2024-09-26  8:44         ` Jie Zhan
2024-09-26 10:08           ` lihuisong (C)
2024-09-19  8:45 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] cppc_cpufreq: Remove HiSilicon CPPC workaround Jie Zhan
2024-09-25  6:30   ` Xiongfeng Wang
2024-09-26  2:59     ` Jie Zhan
2024-09-25  9:36   ` lihuisong (C)
2024-09-26  2:59     ` Jie Zhan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f888bd45-120a-a045-c35c-52ae40ae8a9a@huawei.com \
    --to=lihuisong@huawei.com \
    --cc=beata.michalska@arm.com \
    --cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
    --cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=liaochang1@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=wanghuiqiang@huawei.com \
    --cc=wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com \
    --cc=yangyicong@huawei.com \
    --cc=zengheng4@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhanjie9@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=zhenglifeng1@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox