Re: [PATCH v6 3/4] cpufreq: Set policy->min and max as real QoS constraints

[Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>]

On 3/25/26 07:49, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 24-03-26, 12:40, Pierre Gondois wrote:
>> Being able to set the min/max_freq_req from the driver might be
>> something that is needed, cf:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20260213100633.15413-1-zhangpengjie2@huawei.com/
>>
>> It would also allow to have a common way to set policy->min/max values
>> as they are set to the the cpuinfo.min/max_freq.
>>
>> On the other hand I agree that I didn't test all the possible paths
>> for this change, so this is a bit audacious.
>>
>>
>> What about adding the following to have the values set for all drivers:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>>
>> index 70814c567243b..3a1e5f58a301f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> @@ -1530,6 +1530,9 @@ static int cpufreq_policy_online(struct cpufreq_policy
>> *policy,
>>                                  CPUFREQ_CREATE_POLICY, policy);
>>          }
>>
>> +       policy->max = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>> +       policy->min = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>> +
>>          if (cpufreq_driver->get && has_target()) {
>>                  policy->cur = cpufreq_driver->get(policy->cpu);
>>                  if (!policy->cur) {
> I am okay with a separate series doing all these cleanups. We can set some sort
> of rule on what is expected from the driver here and what is left from the core.
> For example driver only sets cpuinfo.max/min and core takes care of rest. This
> series would cleanup all the drivers, etc.
>
Ok,

Is the current state of this patch + the above modification acceptable ?