lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v7 0/7] cpufreq:boost: CPU Boost mode support
Date
On Monday, August 19, 2013 08:50:37 AM Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2013 12:08:26 +0530 Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
> wrote,
> > On 13 August 2013 15:38, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com>
> > wrote:
> > > This patch series introduces support for CPU overclocking technique
> > > called Boost.
> > >
> > > It is a follow up of a LAB governor proposal. Boost is a LAB
> > > component:
> > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1484746/match=cpufreq
> > >
> > > Boost unifies hardware based solution (e.g. Intel Nehalem) with
> > > software oriented one (like the one done at Exynos).
> > > For this reason cpufreq/freq_table code has been reorganized to
> > > include common code.
> > >
> > > Important design decisions:
> > > - Boost related code is compiled-in unconditionally to cpufreq core
> > > and disabled by default. The cpufreq_driver is responsibile for
> > > setting boost_supported flag and providing set_boost callback(if HW
> > > support is needed). For software managed boost, special Kconfig
> > > flag - CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW has been defined. It will be
> > > selected only when a target platform has thermal framework properly
> > > configured.
> > >
> > > - struct cpufreq_driver has been extended with boost related fields:
> > > -- boost_supported - when driver supports boosting
> > > -- boost_enabled - boost state
> > > -- set_boost - callback to function, which is necessary to
> > > enable/disable boost
> > >
> > > - Boost sysfs attribute (/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost) is
> > > visible _only_ when cpufreq driver supports Boost.
> > >
> > > - No special spin_lock for Boost was created. The one from cpufreq
> > > core was reused.
> > >
> > > - The Boost code doesn't rely on any policy. When boost state is
> > > changed, then the policy list is iterated and proper adjustements
> > > are done.
> > >
> > > - To improve safety level, the thermal framework is also extended
> > > to disable software boosting, when thermal trip point is reached.
> > > Then it starts monitoring target temperature to evaluate if boost
> > > can be enabled again. This emulates behaviour similar to HW managed
> > > boost (like x86)
> > >
> > > Tested at HW:
> > > Exynos 4412 3.11-rc4 Linux
> > > Intel Core i7-3770 3.11-rc4 Linux
> > >
> > > Above patches were posted on top of linux_pm/linux-next with
> > > following patches applied:
> > >
> > > cpufreq: exynos5440: Fix to skip when new frequency same as current
> > > cpufreq: fix EXYNOS drivers selection
> > >
> > > Lukasz Majewski (7):
> > > cpufreq: Add boost frequency support in core
> > > cpufreq:acpi:x86: Adjust the acpi-cpufreq.c code to work with
> > > common boost solution
> > > thermal:boost: Automatic enable/disable of BOOST feature
> > > cpufreq:boost:Kconfig: Provide support for software managed BOOST
> > > cpufreq:exynos:Extend Exynos cpufreq driver to support boost
> > > framework
> > > Documentation:cpufreq:boost: Update BOOST documentation
> > > cpufreq:exynos4x12: Change L0 driver data to CPUFREQ_BOOST_FREQ
> >
> > Hi Lukasz,
> >
>
> Hi Viresh,
>
> > I haven't found time yet to go through this series..
>
> I've just started wondering if I had send those patches correctly :-).
>
> > I want to do a
> > deep/careful review this time as these are almost the final patches.
>
> Ok.
>
> >
> > Will try to get over them by the end of this week..
>
> Ok, I understand.

Do I assume correctly that this stuff has been tested on ACPI-compatible x86
with acpi-cpufreq and everything has worked correctly there?

Rafael



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-08-20 01:41    [W:0.227 / U:4.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site