public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
	Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v1 03/10] cpufreq: Split cpufreq_online()
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 21:41:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3354747.aeNJFYEL58@rjwysocki.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4651448.LvFx2qVVIh@rjwysocki.net>

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>

In preparation for the introduction of cpufreq policy locking guards,
move the part of cpufreq_online() that is carried out under the policy
rwsem into a separate function called cpufreq_policy_online().

No intentional functional impact.

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c |   95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1374,32 +1374,13 @@
 	kfree(policy);
 }
 
-static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
+static int cpufreq_policy_online(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
+				 unsigned int cpu, bool new_policy)
 {
-	struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
-	bool new_policy;
 	unsigned long flags;
 	unsigned int j;
 	int ret;
 
-	pr_debug("%s: bringing CPU%u online\n", __func__, cpu);
-
-	/* Check if this CPU already has a policy to manage it */
-	policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu);
-	if (policy) {
-		WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, policy->related_cpus));
-		if (!policy_is_inactive(policy))
-			return cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(policy, cpu);
-
-		/* This is the only online CPU for the policy.  Start over. */
-		new_policy = false;
-	} else {
-		new_policy = true;
-		policy = cpufreq_policy_alloc(cpu);
-		if (!policy)
-			return -ENOMEM;
-	}
-
 	down_write(&policy->rwsem);
 
 	policy->cpu = cpu;
@@ -1426,7 +1407,7 @@
 		if (ret) {
 			pr_debug("%s: %d: initialization failed\n", __func__,
 				 __LINE__);
-			goto out_free_policy;
+			goto out_clear_policy;
 		}
 
 		/*
@@ -1577,8 +1558,59 @@
 		goto out_destroy_policy;
 	}
 
+out_unlock:
 	up_write(&policy->rwsem);
 
+	return ret;
+
+out_destroy_policy:
+	for_each_cpu(j, policy->real_cpus)
+		remove_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, j, get_cpu_device(j));
+
+out_offline_policy:
+	if (cpufreq_driver->offline)
+		cpufreq_driver->offline(policy);
+
+out_exit_policy:
+	if (cpufreq_driver->exit)
+		cpufreq_driver->exit(policy);
+
+out_clear_policy:
+	cpumask_clear(policy->cpus);
+
+	goto out_unlock;
+}
+
+static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+	struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
+	bool new_policy;
+	int ret;
+
+	pr_debug("%s: bringing CPU%u online\n", __func__, cpu);
+
+	/* Check if this CPU already has a policy to manage it */
+	policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu);
+	if (policy) {
+		WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, policy->related_cpus));
+		if (!policy_is_inactive(policy))
+			return cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(policy, cpu);
+
+		/* This is the only online CPU for the policy.  Start over. */
+		new_policy = false;
+	} else {
+		new_policy = true;
+		policy = cpufreq_policy_alloc(cpu);
+		if (!policy)
+			return -ENOMEM;
+	}
+
+	ret = cpufreq_policy_online(policy, cpu, new_policy);
+	if (ret) {
+		cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
 	kobject_uevent(&policy->kobj, KOBJ_ADD);
 
 	/* Callback for handling stuff after policy is ready */
@@ -1605,25 +1637,6 @@
 	pr_debug("initialization complete\n");
 
 	return 0;
-
-out_destroy_policy:
-	for_each_cpu(j, policy->real_cpus)
-		remove_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, j, get_cpu_device(j));
-
-out_offline_policy:
-	if (cpufreq_driver->offline)
-		cpufreq_driver->offline(policy);
-
-out_exit_policy:
-	if (cpufreq_driver->exit)
-		cpufreq_driver->exit(policy);
-
-out_free_policy:
-	cpumask_clear(policy->cpus);
-	up_write(&policy->rwsem);
-
-	cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
-	return ret;
 }
 
 /**




  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-03-28 21:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-28 20:36 [PATCH v1 00/10] cpufreq: cpufreq_update_limits() fix and some cleanups Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-03-28 20:39 ` [PATCH v1 01/10] cpufreq: Reference count policy in cpufreq_update_limits() Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-03-29  2:02   ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2025-03-29 11:48     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-01  8:30   ` Viresh Kumar
2025-04-01 16:47     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-15 13:08   ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2025-04-15 13:12     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-03-28 20:40 ` [PATCH v1 02/10] cpufreq: Consolidate some code in cpufreq_online() Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-01  8:32   ` Viresh Kumar
2025-03-28 20:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2025-04-01  8:38   ` [PATCH v1 03/10] cpufreq: Split cpufreq_online() Viresh Kumar
2025-04-01  8:43     ` Viresh Kumar
2025-03-28 20:42 ` [PATCH v1 04/10] cpufreq: Add and use cpufreq policy locking guards Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-01  8:43   ` Viresh Kumar
2025-03-28 20:43 ` [PATCH v1 05/10] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Rearrange max frequency updates handling code Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-07 18:46   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-03-28 20:44 ` [PATCH v1 06/10] cpufreq: Use locking guard and __free() in cpufreq_update_policy() Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-01  8:46   ` Viresh Kumar
2025-03-28 20:45 ` [PATCH v1 07/10] cpufreq: Drop cpufreq_cpu_acquire() and cpufreq_cpu_release() Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-01  8:46   ` Viresh Kumar
2025-03-28 20:46 ` [PATCH v1 08/10] cpufreq: Use __free() for policy reference counting cleanup Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-01  8:48   ` Viresh Kumar
2025-03-28 20:47 ` [PATCH v1 09/10] cpufreq: Introduce cpufreq_policy_refresh() Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-01  8:51   ` Viresh Kumar
2025-03-28 20:48 ` [PATCH v1 10/10] cpufreq: Pass policy pointer to ->update_limits() Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-01  8:51   ` Viresh Kumar
2025-04-07 18:48   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-07 22:27     ` srinivas pandruvada
2025-04-07 23:49       ` Doug Smythies
2025-04-08 14:18         ` srinivas pandruvada
2025-04-08 11:41       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-08 13:37         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-08 17:47           ` srinivas pandruvada
2025-04-08 18:34             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-04-08 18:48               ` srinivas pandruvada
2025-04-01 16:57 ` [PATCH v1 00/10] cpufreq: cpufreq_update_limits() fix and some cleanups Mario Limonciello
2025-04-09 19:16 ` Sudeep Holla

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3354747.aeNJFYEL58@rjwysocki.net \
    --to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
    --cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox