From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=none Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EFAB10C9; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 05:00:06 -0800 (PST) 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 E9C931042; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 05:00:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from pluto (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E56963F5A1; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 05:00:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 13:00:02 +0000 From: Cristian Marussi To: Sibi Sankar Cc: sudeep.holla@arm.com, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, quic_mdtipton@quicinc.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, quic_asartor@quicinc.com, quic_lingutla@quicinc.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] firmware: arm_scmi: Increase the maximum opp count Message-ID: References: <20231129065748.19871-1-quic_sibis@quicinc.com> <20231129065748.19871-4-quic_sibis@quicinc.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231129065748.19871-4-quic_sibis@quicinc.com> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 12:27:48PM +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote: > The number of opps on certain variants of the X1E80100 SoC are greater > than current maximum, so increase the MAX_OPP count to the next log level > to accommodate that. > Hi, > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar > --- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c > index 3344ce3a2026..edf34a3c4d6a 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ > #include "protocols.h" > #include "notify.h" > > -#define MAX_OPPS 16 > +#define MAX_OPPS 24 > There is an hashtable, opps_by_freq, sized by an ilog2().... ....so, can we stick to a power-of-2 like 32 instead ? (and be more future proof too...) Other than this, LGTM Reviewed-by: Cristian Marussi Thanks, Cristian