Re: [PATCH v5 08/11] cpufreq: CPPC: sync policy limits when updating min/max_perf

Sumit Gupta
2026-01-08T13:54:16Z

On 25/12/25 19:26, zhenglifeng (A) wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On 2025/12/23 20:13, Sumit Gupta wrote:
>> When min_perf or max_perf is updated via sysfs in autonomous mode, the
>> policy frequency limits should also be updated to reflect the new
>> performance bounds.
>>
>> Add @update_policy parameter to cppc_cpufreq_set_mperf_limit() to
>> control whether policy constraints are synced with HW registers.
>> The policy is updated only when autonomous selection is enabled to
>> keep SW limits in sync with HW.
>>
>> This ensures that scaling_min_freq and scaling_max_freq values remain
>> consistent with the actual min/max_perf register values when operating
>> in autonomous mode.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
>> index 1f8825006940..0202c7b823e6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
>> @@ -544,14 +544,20 @@ static void populate_efficiency_class(void)
>> * cppc_cpufreq_set_mperf_limit - Set min/max performance limit
>> * @policy: cpufreq policy
>> * @val: performance value to set
>> + * @update_policy: whether to update policy constraints
>> * @is_min: true for min_perf, false for max_perf
>> + *
>> + * When @update_policy is true, updates cpufreq policy frequency limits.
>> + * @update_policy is false during cpu_init when policy isn't fully set up.
>> */
>> static int cppc_cpufreq_set_mperf_limit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, u64 val,
>> - bool is_min)
>> + bool update_policy, bool is_min)
>> {
>> struct cppc_cpudata *cpu_data = policy->driver_data;
>> struct cppc_perf_caps *caps = &cpu_data->perf_caps;
>> unsigned int cpu = policy->cpu;
>> + struct freq_qos_request *req;
>> + unsigned int freq;
>> u32 perf;
>> int ret;
>>
>> @@ -571,15 +577,26 @@ static int cppc_cpufreq_set_mperf_limit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, u64 val,
>> else
>> cpu_data->perf_ctrls.max_perf = perf;
>>
>> + if (update_policy) {
>> + freq = cppc_perf_to_khz(caps, perf);
>> + req = is_min ? policy->min_freq_req : policy->max_freq_req;
>> +
>> + ret = freq_qos_update_request(req, freq);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>> + pr_warn("Failed to update %s_freq constraint for CPU%d: %d\n",
>> + is_min ? "min" : "max", cpu, ret);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
> OK. Now I see the necessity of extracting this function. But why not use
> freq_khz as a input parameter and convert it to perf in this funciton,
> since you need the freq here?

That will still need cppc_perf_to_khz to be called so that policy
has what HW actually delivers. Otherwise, there could be some
asymmetry.
Also the clamping is done on perf values. So, if user provides a
very high freq value then that will get passed to freq_qos and the
HW register will have actual perf value which doesn't match with qos.

Either way the conversion chain is:
freq_to_perf -> clamp perf -> set perf -> perf_to_freq -> set qos
It's just a matter of where we place the logic.

Thank you,
Sumit Gupta

>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> -#define cppc_cpufreq_set_min_perf(policy, val) \
>> - cppc_cpufreq_set_mperf_limit(policy, val, true)
>> -
>> -#define cppc_cpufreq_set_max_perf(policy, val) \
>> - cppc_cpufreq_set_mperf_limit(policy, val, false)
>> +#define cppc_cpufreq_set_min_perf(policy, val, update_policy) \
>> + cppc_cpufreq_set_mperf_limit(policy, val, update_policy, true)
>>
>> +#define cppc_cpufreq_set_max_perf(policy, val, update_policy) \
>> + cppc_cpufreq_set_mperf_limit(policy, val, update_policy, false)
>> static struct cppc_cpudata *cppc_cpufreq_get_cpu_data(unsigned int cpu)
>> {
>> struct cppc_cpudata *cpu_data;
>> @@ -988,7 +1005,8 @@ static ssize_t store_min_perf(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, const char *buf,
>> perf = cppc_khz_to_perf(&cpu_data->perf_caps, freq_khz);
>>
>> guard(mutex)(&cppc_cpufreq_update_autosel_config_lock);
>> - ret = cppc_cpufreq_set_min_perf(policy, perf);
>> + ret = cppc_cpufreq_set_min_perf(policy, perf,
>> + cpu_data->perf_ctrls.auto_sel);
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>>
>> @@ -1045,7 +1063,8 @@ static ssize_t store_max_perf(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, const char *buf,
>> perf = cppc_khz_to_perf(&cpu_data->perf_caps, freq_khz);
>>
>> guard(mutex)(&cppc_cpufreq_update_autosel_config_lock);
>> - ret = cppc_cpufreq_set_max_perf(policy, perf);
>> + ret = cppc_cpufreq_set_max_perf(policy, perf,
>> + cpu_data->perf_ctrls.auto_sel);
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>>