Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-fw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq FW driver | From | Taniya Das <> | Date | Thu, 12 Jul 2018 23:36:24 +0530 |
| |
Please help review of the new series[v5] which takes care of the below.
- Remove mapping different register regions of perf/lut/enable, instead map the entire HW region. - Add reg_offset/cpufreq_qcom_std_offsets to be supplied as device data. - Check of src == 0 during lut read. - Add of_node_put(cpu_np) in qcom_get_related_cpus - Update the qcom_cpu_resources_init for register offset data, and cleanup the related cpus to keep a single copy of CPUfreq. - Replace FW with HW, update Kconfig, rename filename qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
On 7/12/2018 2:07 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 04:32:35PM +0530, Taniya Das wrote: >> The CPUfreq FW present in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps necessary >> for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver implements the cpufreq >> driver interface for this firmware. >> >> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> >> Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org> >> --- >> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 9 + >> drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c | 336 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 346 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> index 52f5f1a..2683716 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm >> @@ -312,3 +312,12 @@ config ARM_PXA2xx_CPUFREQ >> This add the CPUFreq driver support for Intel PXA2xx SOCs. >> >> If in doubt, say N. >> + >> +config ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW >> + bool "QCOM CPUFreq FW driver" >> + help >> + Support for the CPUFreq FW driver. >> + The CPUfreq FW preset in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps >> + necessary for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver >> + implements the cpufreq driver interface for this firmware. >> + Say Y if you want to support CPUFreq FW. >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile >> index fb4a2ec..34691a2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile >> @@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA124_CPUFREQ) += tegra124-cpufreq.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA186_CPUFREQ) += tegra186-cpufreq.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TI_CPUFREQ) += ti-cpufreq.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VEXPRESS_SPC_CPUFREQ) += vexpress-spc-cpufreq.o >> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW) += qcom-cpufreq-fw.o >> >> >> ################################################################################## >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..62f4452 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,336 @@ >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >> +/* >> + * Copyright (c) 2018, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved. >> + */ >> + >> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h> >> +#include <linux/init.h> >> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >> +#include <linux/module.h> >> +#include <linux/of_address.h> >> +#include <linux/of_platform.h> >> + >> +#define INIT_RATE 300000000UL >> +#define XO_RATE 19200000UL >> +#define LUT_MAX_ENTRIES 40U >> +#define CORE_COUNT_VAL(val) (((val) & (GENMASK(18, 16))) >> 16) >> +#define LUT_ROW_SIZE 32 >> + >> +struct cpufreq_qcom { >> + struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table; >> + struct device *dev; >> + void __iomem *perf_base; >> + void __iomem *lut_base; >> + cpumask_t related_cpus; >> + unsigned int max_cores; > > Why *max*_cores? This seems to be the number of CPUs in a cluster and > qcom_read_lut() expects the core count read from the LUT to match > exactly. > >> +static int qcom_read_lut(struct platform_device *pdev, >> + struct cpufreq_qcom *c) >> +{ >> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >> + u32 data, src, lval, i, core_count, prev_cc, prev_freq, cur_freq; >> + >> + c->table = devm_kcalloc(dev, LUT_MAX_ENTRIES + 1, >> + sizeof(*c->table), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!c->table) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < LUT_MAX_ENTRIES; i++) { >> + data = readl_relaxed(c->lut_base + i * LUT_ROW_SIZE); >> + src = ((data & GENMASK(31, 30)) >> 30); >> + lval = (data & GENMASK(7, 0)); >> + core_count = CORE_COUNT_VAL(data); >> + >> + if (!src) >> + c->table[i].frequency = INIT_RATE / 1000; >> + else >> + c->table[i].frequency = XO_RATE * lval / 1000; > > nit: any particular reason to use negative logic here? Why not check > for 'src[ != NULL]', which also seems to be the more common case. > >> +static int qcom_get_related_cpus(struct device_node *np, struct cpumask *m) >> +{ >> + struct device_node *cpu_np, *freq_np; >> + int cpu; >> + >> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { >> + cpu_np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu); >> + if (!cpu_np) >> + continue; >> + freq_np = of_parse_phandle(cpu_np, "qcom,freq-domain", 0); >> + if (!freq_np) >> + continue; >> + if (freq_np == np) >> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, m); > > missing 'of_node_put(cpu_np)'. You might want to do it at the end of > the loop and use a 'goto' above instead of 'continue'. > >> +static int qcom_cpu_resources_init(struct platform_device *pdev, >> + struct device_node *np, unsigned int cpu) >> +{ >> + struct cpufreq_qcom *c; >> + struct resource res; >> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >> + void __iomem *en_base; >> + int index, ret; >> + >> + c = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*c), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!c) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + index = of_property_match_string(np, "reg-names", "enable"); >> + if (index < 0) >> + return index; >> + >> + if (of_address_to_resource(np, index, &res)) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + en_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res.start, resource_size(&res)); >> + if (!en_base) { >> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to map %s enable-base\n", np->name); >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + } >> + >> + /* FW should be in enabled state to proceed */ >> + if (!(readl_relaxed(en_base) & 0x1)) { >> + dev_err(dev, "%s firmware not enabled\n", np->name); >> + return -ENODEV; >> + } >> + devm_iounmap(&pdev->dev, en_base); >> + >> + index = of_property_match_string(np, "reg-names", "perf"); >> + if (index < 0) >> + return index; >> + >> + if (of_address_to_resource(np, index, &res)) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + c->perf_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res.start, resource_size(&res)); >> + if (!c->perf_base) { >> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to map %s perf-base\n", np->name); >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + } >> + >> + index = of_property_match_string(np, "reg-names", "lut"); >> + if (index < 0) >> + return index; >> + >> + if (of_address_to_resource(np, index, &res)) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + c->lut_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res.start, resource_size(&res)); >> + if (!c->lut_base) { >> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to map %s lut-base\n", np->name); >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + } > > The of_property_match_string() - of_address_to_resource() - > devm_ioremap() pattern is repeated 3x. In case the binding doesn't > change (there is discussion on the DT patch) you might want to move > this to a helper. > >> +static int qcom_resources_init(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct device_node *np, *cpu_np; >> + unsigned int cpu; >> + int ret; >> + >> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { >> + cpu_np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu); >> + if (!cpu_np) { >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get cpu %d device\n", >> + cpu); >> + continue; >> + } >> + >> + np = of_parse_phandle(cpu_np, "qcom,freq-domain", 0); >> + if (!np) { >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get freq-domain device\n"); > of_node_put(cpu_np); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + of_node_put(cpu_np); >> + >> + ret = qcom_cpu_resources_init(pdev, np, cpu); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + } >> + >> + return 0; > > Cheers > > Matthias >
-- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.
--
| |