From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 281F5CA9EB9 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:32:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5F5D2084C for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:32:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="baiXMDKm" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E5F5D2084C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=LRHSOmtz46a6WMJ9FF7aBK2T/ui6VIQld2TqQbhcPx0=; b=baiXMDKmWjI2NK N9/JcVo2rIuJLdY8zqYizwf0I0G7id7XF9i5BLSnIGaJq0xA7yYiTHAlObQs9gVNYWh1z4AvqgBNs fBR1h39BcJWiB0EpxmlVPhhYQ11UbHli3kfClM+UsVZve6eahCF+uVzwp7YmAnbjvhJ5sZkAhZrdW uesBtfsWaVlon3yXDwb7dQ9ipRZTM3V/Vv29dnhuLaCRscAWIhlHfq3F8v9dk6Oo6UumxqPsfl3NF hAUS8JqKfver0HB6atUFcWNE5XE4a1fDMirbrUnXnIbDGIX8EMZhSzG3Xznnk4zj4/BWYFTSskfKk fdC66oIYWxDU7fj6OJjw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iOYM1-0007aV-FC; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:32:29 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iOYLy-0007TJ-Fz for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:32:27 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4864E1FB; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 19:32:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e107533-lin.cambridge.arm.com (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3417A3F6C4; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 19:32:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:32:13 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Ulf Hansson Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/13] cpuidle: psci: Attach CPU devices to their PM domains Message-ID: <20191027023213.GD18111@e107533-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20191010113937.15962-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> <20191010113937.15962-12-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> <20191024163515.GD22036@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20191026_193226_578617_4B6BF404 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 20.47 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Linux PM , Stephen Boyd , linux-arm-msm , Daniel Lezcano , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Lina Iyer , Bjorn Andersson , Kevin Hilman , Rob Herring , Linux ARM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 06:55:50PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 at 18:35, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 01:39:35PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > In order to enable a CPU to be power managed through its PM domain, let's > > > try to attach it by calling psci_dt_attach_cpu() during the cpuidle > > > initialization. > > > > > > psci_dt_attach_cpu() returns a pointer to the attached struct device, which > > > later should be used for runtime PM, hence we need to store it somewhere. > > > Rather than adding yet another per CPU variable, let's create a per CPU > > > struct to collect the relevant per CPU variables. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson > > > --- > > > drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++---- > > > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c > > > index a16467daf99d..1510422c7a53 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c > > > +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c > > > @@ -23,7 +23,12 @@ > > > #include "cpuidle-psci.h" > > > #include "dt_idle_states.h" > > > > > > -static DEFINE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(u32 *, psci_power_state); > > > +struct psci_cpuidle_data { > > > + u32 *psci_states; > > > + struct device *dev; > > > +}; > > > + > > > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(struct psci_cpuidle_data, psci_cpuidle_data); > > > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u32, domain_state); > > > > > > > /me just thinking still: If it make sense to keep psci_states separate > > and domain_state and only other things needed for RPM/OSI in the > > structure. I do understand that we modify domain_state and hence > > we can't use READ_MOSTLY then. Let's see, for now keep it as is, thought > > I will think out aloud. > > I believe we are striving towards the same goal, which likely means to > separate the non-OSI path vs OSI path, as much as possible. Simply to > avoid any unnecessary operation being done in the non-OSI path. Right? > Yes > However, while I was trying to address that, I realized that it would > probably introduce even more changes to the series. Therefore, it > thought it may be better to address these kind of changes on top, as > improvements. > If possible better to amend this unless it's too complicated. -- Regards, Sudeep _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel