From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751346AbdARAjX (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 17 Jan 2017 19:39:23 -0500
Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:29381 "EHLO mga01.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751158AbdARAjW (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 17 Jan 2017 19:39:22 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,247,1477983600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="923718638"
Message-ID: <1484699961.3886.42.camel@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform: x86: Support Turbo Boost Max for non HWP
 systems
From: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
To: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 16:39:21 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20170118003227.GC2599@wisp>
References: <1484166994-95577-1-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
         <20170118003227.GC2599@wisp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2017-01-17 at 16:32 -0800, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:36:34PM -0800, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > 
> > On platforms supporting Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, the
> > maximum turbo frequencies (turbo ratio) of some cores in a CPU
> > package
> > may be higher than the other cores in the same package.  In that
> > case,
> > better performance can be achieved by making the scheduler prefer
> > to run
> > tasks on the CPUs with higher max turbo frequencies.
> > 
> > On Intel® Broadwell Xeon systems, it is optional to turn on HWP
> > (Hardware P-States). When HWP is not turned on, the BIOS doesn't
> > present required CPPC (Collaborative Processor Performance Control)
> > tables. This table is used to get the per CPU core maximum
> > performance
> > ratio and inform scheduler (in cpufreq/intel_pstate driver).
> > 
> > On such systems the maximum performance ratio can be read via over
> > clocking (OC) mailbox interface for each CPU. This interface is not
> > architectural and can change for every model of processors.
> > 
> > This driver reads maximum performance ratio of each CPU and set up
> > the scheduler priority metrics. In this way scheduler can prefer
> > CPU
> > with higher performance to schedule tasks.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel
> > .com>
> 
> Thanks Srinivas,
> 
> Driver queued to testing with the following changes, but see below...
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_turbo_boost_max_enum.c
> b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_turbo_boost_max_enum.c
> index 5ad3257..5df43c9 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_turbo_boost_max_enum.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_turbo_boost_max_enum.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>  /*
>   * Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 legacy (non HWP) enumeration
> driver
>   * Copyright (c) 2017, Intel Corporation.
> + * All rights reserved.
> 
> This is the preferred format last time I asked Intel legal.
> 
>   *
>   * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> modify it
>   * under the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License,
> @@ -37,10 +38,8 @@
>  
>  static int get_oc_core_priority(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
> -       u64 value;
> -       u64 cmd = OC_MAILBOX_FC_CONTROL_CMD;
> -       int i;
> -       int ret;
> +       u64 value, cmd = OC_MAILBOX_FC_CONTROL_CMD;
> +       int ret, i;
>  
> Subjective, but we prefer to save the lines.
> 
>         /* Issue favored core read command */
>         value = cmd << MSR_OC_MAILBOX_CMD_OFFSET;
> 
> 
> > 
> > ---
> >  drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig                      |  10 ++
> >  drivers/platform/x86/Makefile                     |   1 +
> >  drivers/platform/x86/intel_turbo_boost_max_enum.c | 153
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> Regarding the name, two nits:
> 
> 1) It's soooooooooooooooo long..... and the CONFIG_* too.
> 2) Since it is BDW specifc, how about:
> 
> intel_bdw_turbo.c
> CONFIG_INTEL_BDW_TURBO
We should add _MAX_3 as this is a technology more than simple TURBO.

CONFIG_INTEL_BDW_TURBO_MAX_3

> 
> I don't think "max enumeration" conveys any meaning to most readers.
> 
> Thoughts?
Fine with me with the above comment.

Thanks,
Srinivas