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 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 smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BEFAD59D8C for ; Fri, 12 Dec 2025 20:09:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=SEbB1MH9XGDpJM4oMQNVsN7bK44BZtG/FPTM+kXGBuM=; b=e45FO0tlHh4fAVQs00eo6tJdIa 3k75aCR1MopgUZhurkLCSH7lWtoRXIjyrrqwpn0L0JFMAlKstxng5eBrDjhveVCZ3XlUIr2NJzayO PWOO+rAnS/jRm4rR5CZOqQfL2BVEcqLzWV7QnA9SjnQeSBq1qkJLlpPMY74XbKRrknQnhW3fm4D8r BxcozpMh2qYozZBnTGcsJG+TwtsTI1nABjqcRXmyNoUp3Xec/HSmyiIBCLXonpS1AHLjAQ3RZr1c0 myfXXYSGF7Proy2ja7v+eCDQcdOF5l6+zvMoOrDyZkajERTrtGkDV8MqD41ikVwQUSrOYJ6cJIqam Sw10E8qA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vU9Rp-000000011zt-20MS; Fri, 12 Dec 2025 20:09:05 +0000 Received: from tor.source.kernel.org ([172.105.4.254]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vU9Ro-000000011zl-0zEq for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2025 20:09:04 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6290E60017; Fri, 12 Dec 2025 20:09:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9179C4CEF1; Fri, 12 Dec 2025 20:08:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1765570143; bh=YYMImzrZ+6ZKJx4/H0T7um10BEk1uBLaINM4peWTmaQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=dXFsLIVYJcYusP2Gb6FtTIV1/ytUmaKR3NTRfaufIx2hH50LC3BWxd5wb0ELal9ux grAZqZGWR0LNamNy2pAdRglzn5xlUUR/lmd1DvzQ/VLN4fx2UxVOehR0s7c7S2nMzG vHlfbiumk2SKA7P4JNzfKf6zeKSc1MZabHp8srjt4qK4WYMuC4D87lJBZGcjJDnXce o3iI54qz/CP0fb2iiXWL+0v9Jm727DVp4Mqe+FwRU1VvZFaMW/9EpiccALwmoYqFSH RJ6vwHZGD5x96rblKNv0r8HUL71B4YkGqbdZ+/SMVyTOCyCXIo3YcsbAfJpIgUTrtV rT3sINvqQ5F8A== Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2025 05:08:55 +0900 From: Will Deacon To: "zhenglifeng (A)" Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, Beata Michalska , rafael@kernel.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, dakr@kernel.org, ionela.voinescu@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linuxarm@huawei.com, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, zhanjie9@hisilicon.com, lihuisong@huawei.com, yubowen8@huawei.com, zhangpengjie2@huawei.com, wangzhi12@huawei.com, linhongye@h-partners.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] arm64: topology: Handle AMU FIE setup on CPU hotplug Message-ID: References: <20251119081356.2495290-1-zhenglifeng1@huawei.com> <9b6882dc-a91a-42d6-bf76-347338930d71@huawei.com> <29253319-ced9-4ab6-a58e-28afdf235cde@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <29253319-ced9-4ab6-a58e-28afdf235cde@huawei.com> X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 05:27:09PM +0800, zhenglifeng (A) wrote: > On 2025/12/2 23:31, Beata Michalska wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 02, 2025 at 11:05:25AM +0800, zhenglifeng (A) wrote: > >> On 2025/12/1 23:27, Beata Michalska wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Apologies for the delay in reviewing this - currently in progress.... > >>> Out of curiosity: what's the cpufreq driver used for testing this series ? > >> > >> I used cppc_cpufreq for testing this. But with some modifications in > >> processor_driver.c, or you'll find that the driver will fail to load with > >> maxcpus set. The modification below is only a temporary solution. I'm still > >> working on that. > >> > > Right, so overall the implementation looks good - thanks for that. > > There are two issues though with the cppc cpufreq driver. > > > > One: as you have already noticed - it fails to register when > > cpumask_present != cpumask_online. > > > > Second: it will mix the sources of the freq scale if not all CPUs within the > > policy have AMUs enabled/valid. This is due to the fact that at the time of > > registering the driver and initializing the FIE support policy->cpus == > > policy->related_cpus. Assuming scenario when there are two CPUs within the > > policy, one being offline and missing valid AMU counters, > > the topology_set_scale_freq_source from cppc cpufreq driver will register > > the tick handler for both CPUs, whereas AMU support will (rightly so) register > > only for the firs one. When the second CPU comes online, the mismatch will be > > detected and the arch callback will get cleared for the first CPU, but the > > second one will remain unchanged. > > > > That said, I do not think any of those issues is a blocker for this series. > > But both would need fixing. > > I believe Beata is OK with this series. So I think we can move ahead with it > now. Please repost at -rc1. It would be nice to have an Ack from Beata... Will