From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751417AbeDFBVV convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2018 21:21:21 -0400 Received: from mx01.hxt-semitech.com.96.203.223.in-addr.arpa ([223.203.96.7]:54875 "EHLO barracuda.hxt-semitech.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751280AbeDFBVT (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2018 21:21:19 -0400 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1522977675-093b7e10b3319e0001-xx1T2L X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: shunyong.yang@hxt-semitech.com From: "Yang, Shunyong" To: "viresh.kumar@linaro.org" CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Zheng, Joey" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: cppc_cpufreq: Initialize shared cpu's perf capabilities Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: cppc_cpufreq: Initialize shared cpu's perf capabilities X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: cppc_cpufreq: Initialize shared cpu's perf capabilities Thread-Index: AQHTy/XJXfOHf7atGkaXAZEUhTEY6KPv42oAgAKJmwA= Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 01:21:05 +0000 Message-ID: <1522977662.9269.2.camel@hxt-semitech.com> References: <1522833380-18438-1-git-send-email-shunyong.yang@hxt-semitech.com> <20180404103600.GJ3572@vireshk-i7> In-Reply-To: <20180404103600.GJ3572@vireshk-i7> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.127.0.11] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Barracuda-Connect: localhost[10.128.0.15] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1522977675 X-Barracuda-Encrypted: ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA X-Barracuda-URL: https://192.168.50.101:443/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.5598 1.0000 0.7500 X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.75 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.75 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=9.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.3.49625 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Kumar, On Wed, 2018-04-04 at 16:06 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 04-04-18, 17:16, Shunyong Yang wrote: > > > > When multiple cpus are related in one cpufreq policy, the first > > online > > cpu will be chosen by default to handle cpufreq operations. Let's > > take > > cpu0 and cpu1 as an example. > > > > When cpu0 is offline, policy->cpu will be shifted to cpu1. Cpu1's > > perf > > capabilities should be initialized. Otherwise, perf capabilities > > are 0s > > and speed change can not take effect. > > > > This patch copies perf capabilities of the first online cpu to > > other > > shared cpus when policy shared type is CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY. > > > > Cc: Joey Zheng > > Signed-off-by: Shunyong Yang > > --- > > > > Changes in v2: > >   -Add unlikely in cpu comparison per Kumar's comments. > >   -Fix coding style per Kumar's comments. > > > > Changes in v1: > >   -Drop RFC tag, > >      The original RFC link, > >      https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10299055/. > > > >      This patch solves same issue as RFC above. > > > >      Patch name is changed as code is too much different with RFC > > above. > > > >   -Remove extra init() per Viresh Kumar's comments and only handle > >    CPPC CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY case. > > > > --- > >  drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 15 +++++++++++++-- > >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > index 8f7b21a4d537..679e43b9c980 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > @@ -164,9 +164,20 @@ static int cppc_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct > > cpufreq_policy *policy) > >   policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency = > > cppc_get_transition_latency(cpu_num); > >   policy->shared_type = cpu->shared_type; > >   > > - if (policy->shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY) > > + if (policy->shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY) { > > + int i; > > + > >   cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, cpu->shared_cpu_map); > > - else if (policy->shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ALL) { > > + > > + for_each_cpu(i, policy->cpus) { > > + if (unlikely(i == policy->cpu)) > > + continue; > > + > > + memcpy(&all_cpu_data[i]->perf_caps, > > +        &cpu->perf_caps, > > +        sizeof(cpu->perf_caps)); > I think this can be written in two lines without violating the 80 > columns rule. I think you mean change like following?      memcpy(&all_cpu_data[i]->perf_caps, &cpu->perf_caps,             sizeof(cpu->perf_caps)); I will send v3 to change this. Thanks. Shunyong. > > > > > + } > > + } else if (policy->shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ALL) > > { > >   /* Support only SW_ANY for now. */ > >   pr_debug("Unsupported CPU co-ord type\n"); > >   return -EFAULT; > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar >