From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1CEA30DECE; Tue, 5 May 2026 22:13:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778019231; cv=none; b=WobMjUOd+iFXn5lTW/RBce3uoSzBKkiA60HO+xT9BR19f6WY2a96dsqhwcRLc6i9SQBecajMtfNW75QkOUJdRJhmZOCi06C6nbTTvRQPUhXg1LP/+QDpKFxoRN8bcKbnjqFxfCot7B8f5a3nRh6zxgrq115fgub9Q0p4XgYC2Wg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778019231; c=relaxed/simple; bh=JXBOIDwb6e1s8ZmaUYlylleYRr14801abN82WNXhBdw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=C7pK6KWGUFkMlBOCfk0MfrYTM3R3cN57QNRaifUh2lpZNblYGYqB/DaLFnALRw9itySlASJ7SSzUoPHw6+A7mpPUfXGEbkHzrx4czY2E2kG+thO0l0+Q4zS50gVYy7I8JFn4hJixnVoYzHGh9+kf/LqamyjJtA19TiEvPati+Wc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=jkH6N7qm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="jkH6N7qm" 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 DDE011A9A; Tue, 5 May 2026 15:13:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9AF53F763; Tue, 5 May 2026 15:13:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1778019229; bh=JXBOIDwb6e1s8ZmaUYlylleYRr14801abN82WNXhBdw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=jkH6N7qm7iFUSnanVg4zc3SjNFJmR3DX6GnHivCcMFaj7oPAEQj3WH/yjmZ2bmsJu glE6HX01WYbGrfcx9MQXTfI6OffegBZ1vX5OlSz19lkvgSAkROqw7KKgleZel35yCA Vi8R92y5+9+CQk4rqYOYsk2/tUPMPGgDl5gKTO+g= Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 23:13:44 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: Philip Radford Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, etienne.carriere@st.com, peng.fan@oss.nxp.com, michal.simek@amd.com, quic_sibis@quicinc.com, dan.carpenter@linaro.org, d-gole@ti.com, souvik.chakravarty@arm.com, cristian.marussi@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/12] powercap: arm_scmi: Add get_power_uw to synthetic node Message-ID: References: <20260428090922.346069-1-philip.radford@arm.com> <20260428090922.346069-12-philip.radford@arm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@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: <20260428090922.346069-12-philip.radford@arm.com> On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 10:09:20AM +0100, Philip Radford wrote: > Exposes the current power usage from the immediate children of > the synthetic (root) powercap node. Iterates over pr->spzones and > sums per-zone power. > > Signed-off-by: Philip Radford > --- > drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c b/drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c > index d74869af1633..81b5214acda4 100644 > --- a/drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c > +++ b/drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c > @@ -270,9 +270,34 @@ static int instance_root_release(struct powercap_zone *pz) > return 0; > } > > -static int instance_root_get_power_uw(struct powercap_zone *pz, u64 *v) > +static int instance_root_get_power_uw(struct powercap_zone *pz, u64 *power_uw) > { > - *v = 0; > + struct scmi_powercap_zone *root = to_scmi_powercap_zone(pz); > + struct scmi_powercap_zone *child; > + struct scmi_powercap_root *pr; > + u64 acc = 0; > + u64 p; These u64 can live on a single line... > + int ret; > + > + if (!pz || !power_uw) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + pr = container_of(root, struct scmi_powercap_root, instance_root); usually we define macros to wrap this like to_scmi_powercap_zone()... ...even if used only once...this could be a new to_scmi_powercap_root() > + if (!pr) > + return -ENODEV; > + > + list_for_each_entry(child, &pr->registered_zones[0], node) { > + if (child == &pr->instance_root) > + continue; You'll need to check this in light of the fixes of previous patch > + > + ret = scmi_powercap_get_power_uw(&child->zone, &p); > + if (!ret) > + acc += p; > + else > + dev_dbg(child->dev, "Failed to read child power: %u\n", ret); > + } > + > + *power_uw = acc; > return 0; > } > Thanks, Cristian