From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Srinivas Pandruvada Subject: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: fix inconsistency in setting policy limits Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2016 19:42:11 -0700 Message-ID: <1459737731-7386-1-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:12384 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751022AbcDDCpW (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Apr 2016 22:45:22 -0400 Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Srinivas Pandruvada When user sets performance policy using cpufreq interface, it is possible that because of policy->max limits, the actual performance is still limited. But the current implementation will silently switch the policy to powersave and start using powersave limits. If user modifies any limits using intel_pstate sysfs, this is actually changing powersave limits. The current implementation tracks limits under powersave and performance policy using two different variables. When policy->max is less than policy->cpuinfo.max_freq, only powersave limit variable is used. This fix involves uses performance limits variable always when policy is performance. Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada --- v2: Rebased on top of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git branch: linux-next drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c index a382195..4674804 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c @@ -1140,6 +1140,20 @@ static void intel_pstate_clear_update_util_hook(unsigned int cpu) synchronize_sched(); } +static void intel_pstate_set_performance_limits(struct perf_limits *limits) +{ + limits->no_turbo = 0; + limits->turbo_disabled = 0; + limits->max_perf_pct = 100; + limits->max_perf = int_tofp(1); + limits->min_perf_pct = 100; + limits->min_perf = int_tofp(1); + limits->max_policy_pct = 100; + limits->max_sysfs_pct = 100; + limits->min_policy_pct = 0; + limits->min_sysfs_pct = 0; +} + static int intel_pstate_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) { if (!policy->cpuinfo.max_freq) @@ -1147,15 +1161,18 @@ static int intel_pstate_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) intel_pstate_clear_update_util_hook(policy->cpu); - if (policy->policy == CPUFREQ_POLICY_PERFORMANCE && - policy->max >= policy->cpuinfo.max_freq) { - pr_debug("intel_pstate: set performance\n"); + if (policy->policy == CPUFREQ_POLICY_PERFORMANCE) { limits = &performance_limits; - goto out; + if (policy->max >= policy->cpuinfo.max_freq) { + pr_debug("intel_pstate: set performance\n"); + intel_pstate_set_performance_limits(limits); + goto out; + } + } else { + pr_debug("intel_pstate: set powersave\n"); + limits = &powersave_limits; } - pr_debug("intel_pstate: set powersave\n"); - limits = &powersave_limits; limits->min_policy_pct = (policy->min * 100) / policy->cpuinfo.max_freq; limits->min_policy_pct = clamp_t(int, limits->min_policy_pct, 0 , 100); limits->max_policy_pct = DIV_ROUND_UP(policy->max * 100, -- 2.5.0