From: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Georgi Djakov <djakov@kernel.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>,
Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] interconnect: qcom: icc-rpm: Remodel how QoS settings are stored
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:57:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZgM2naP4mGLKwbCV@gerhold.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240326-topic-rpm_icc_qos_cleanup-v1-4-357e736792be@linaro.org>
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 08:42:35PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> Currently, the QoS settings are stored in the node data, even though
> they're a property of the bus/provider instead. Moreover, they are only
> needed during the probe step, so they can be easily moved into struct
> qcom_icc_desc.
>
> Reshuffle things around to make it anywhere near readable & comparable
> with a reference. As a nice bonus, a lot of bytes are shaved off and
> a few miliseconds are shaved off here and there.
>
> As an example, bloat-o-meter reports this on sm6115.o:
> Total: Before=14799, After=13263, chg -10.38%
>
> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/icc-rpm.c | 123 +++++----
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/icc-rpm.h | 13 +-
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8909.c | 268 ++++++++++---------
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8916.c | 153 ++++++-----
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8939.c | 157 ++++++-----
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8996.c | 517 +++++++++++++++++-------------------
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/qcm2290.c | 416 +++++++++++++++++------------
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/sdm660.c | 393 +++++++++++++--------------
> drivers/interconnect/qcom/sm6115.c | 239 ++++++++++++-----
> 9 files changed, 1224 insertions(+), 1055 deletions(-)
>
> [...]
> @@ -70,20 +68,18 @@ struct qcom_icc_provider {
> };
>
> /**
> - * struct qcom_icc_qos - Qualcomm specific interconnect QoS parameters
> + * struct qcom_icc_qos_data - Qualcomm specific interconnect QoS parameters
> * @areq_prio: node requests priority
> * @prio_level: priority level for bus communication
> * @limit_commands: activate/deactivate limiter mode during runtime
> - * @ap_owned: indicates if the node is owned by the AP or by the RPM
> * @qos_mode: default qos mode for this node
> * @qos_port: qos port number for finding qos registers of this node
> * @urg_fwd_en: enable urgent forwarding
> */
> -struct qcom_icc_qos {
> +struct qcom_icc_qos_data {
> u32 areq_prio;
> u32 prio_level;
> bool limit_commands;
> - bool ap_owned;
> int qos_mode;
> int qos_port;
> bool urg_fwd_en;
Side note: There is a potential for more micro-optimization here: You
could save 4 bytes of padding if you move all bools together at the end
of the struct. :D
> [...]
> @@ -134,6 +131,8 @@ struct qcom_icc_desc {
> bool keep_alive;
> enum qcom_icc_type type;
> const struct regmap_config *regmap_cfg;
> + const struct qcom_icc_qos_data * const qos_data;
> + const u16 qos_data_num;
> unsigned int qos_offset;
Nitpick: Why is the u16 const when the other (non-pointer) members are
not? The u16 also feels a bit like overkill here. The struct would have
exactly the same size with a full unsigned int because of padding.
Alternatively, you could consider using an empty last entry as sentinel
instead of adding the count (i.e. with NOC_QOS_MODE_INVALID = 0). Not
sure what is cleaner here.
I haven't looked closely at the actual conversion of the definitions in
the drivers. What is the chance that you made an accidental mistake in
there? Or was it scripted? :D
Thanks,
Stephan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-26 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-26 19:42 [PATCH 0/4] Rework rpm-icc QoS settings Konrad Dybcio
2024-03-26 19:42 ` [PATCH 1/4] interconnect: qcom: sm6115: Unspaghettify SNoC QoS port numbering Konrad Dybcio
2024-03-26 20:13 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2024-03-26 20:32 ` Konrad Dybcio
2024-03-26 19:42 ` [PATCH 2/4] interconnect: qcom: qcm2290: Fix mas_snoc_bimc QoS port assignment Konrad Dybcio
2024-03-26 20:16 ` Stephan Gerhold
2024-03-26 21:32 ` Konrad Dybcio
2024-03-26 19:42 ` [PATCH 3/4] interconnect: qcom: icc-rpm: Make simple functions return void Konrad Dybcio
2024-03-26 20:14 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2024-05-08 1:57 ` Mike Tipton
2024-03-26 19:42 ` [PATCH 4/4] interconnect: qcom: icc-rpm: Remodel how QoS settings are stored Konrad Dybcio
2024-03-26 20:57 ` Stephan Gerhold [this message]
2024-03-26 21:12 ` Konrad Dybcio
2024-05-08 1:45 ` Mike Tipton
2024-06-18 14:27 ` Konrad Dybcio
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=ZgM2naP4mGLKwbCV@gerhold.net \
--to=stephan@gerhold.net \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=djakov@kernel.org \
--cc=konrad.dybcio@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marijn.suijten@somainline.org \
--cc=shawn.guo@linaro.org \
/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