From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57B341A00E9 for ; Fri, 8 May 2015 13:46:55 +1000 (AEST) Received: from e17.ny.us.ibm.com (e17.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.207]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F1E614030D for ; Fri, 8 May 2015 13:46:54 +1000 (AEST) Received: from /spool/local by e17.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 7 May 2015 23:46:51 -0400 Received: from b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.23]) by d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78CF6E803C for ; Thu, 7 May 2015 23:38:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01av05.pok.ibm.com (d01av05.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.195]) by b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id t483kmOX53608550 for ; Fri, 8 May 2015 03:46:48 GMT Received: from d01av05.pok.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d01av05.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id t483klGd015781 for ; Thu, 7 May 2015 23:46:47 -0400 Message-ID: <554C31A4.8050903@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 09:16:44 +0530 From: Preeti U Murthy MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] cpufreq: powernv: Call throttle_check() on receiving OCC_THROTTLE References: <1430729652-14813-1-git-send-email-shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <5548824C.2030602@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <554B584A.3030507@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4161534.4Jyd5dl4um@vostro.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <4161534.4Jyd5dl4um@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shilpasri G Bhat , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 05/08/2015 02:29 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, May 07, 2015 05:49:22 PM Preeti U Murthy wrote: >> On 05/05/2015 02:11 PM, Preeti U Murthy wrote: >>> On 05/05/2015 12:03 PM, Shilpasri G Bhat wrote: >>>> Hi Preeti, >>>> >>>> On 05/05/2015 09:30 AM, Preeti U Murthy wrote: >>>>> Hi Shilpa, >>>>> >>>>> On 05/04/2015 02:24 PM, Shilpasri G Bhat wrote: >>>>>> Re-evaluate the chip's throttled state on recieving OCC_THROTTLE >>>>>> notification by executing *throttle_check() on any one of the cpu on >>>>>> the chip. This is a sanity check to verify if we were indeed >>>>>> throttled/unthrottled after receiving OCC_THROTTLE notification. >>>>>> >>>>>> We cannot call *throttle_check() directly from the notification >>>>>> handler because we could be handling chip1's notification in chip2. So >>>>>> initiate an smp_call to execute *throttle_check(). We are irq-disabled >>>>>> in the notification handler, so use a worker thread to smp_call >>>>>> throttle_check() on any of the cpu in the chipmask. >>>>> >>>>> I see that the first patch takes care of reporting *per-chip* throttling >>>>> for pmax capping condition. But where are we taking care of reporting >>>>> "pstate set to safe" and "freq control disabled" scenarios per-chip ? >>>>> >>>> >>>> IMO let us not have "psafe" and "freq control disabled" states managed per-chip. >>>> Because when the above two conditions occur it is likely to happen across all >>>> chips during an OCC reset cycle. So I am setting 'throttled' to false on >>>> OCC_ACTIVE and re-verifying if it actually is the case by invoking >>>> *throttle_check(). >>> >>> Alright like I pointed in the previous reply, a comment to indicate that >>> psafe and freq control disabled conditions will fail when occ is >>> inactive and that all chips face the consequence of this will help. >> >> From your explanation on the thread of the first patch of this series, >> this will not be required. >> >> So, >> Reviewed-by: Preeti U Murthy > > OK, so is the whole series reviewed now? Yes the whole series has been reviewed. Regards Preeti U Murthy > >