Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:13:15 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] cpufreq: arm_big_little: Add support to register a cpufreq cooling device | From | Viresh Kumar <> |
| |
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> wrote: > Register passive cooling devices when initialising cpufreq on > big.LITTLE systems. If the device tree provides a dynamic power > coefficient for the CPUs then the bound cooling device will support > the extensions that allow it to be used with all the existing thermal > governors including the power allocator governor. > > A cooling device will be created per individual frequency domain and > can be bound to thermal zones via the thermal DT bindings. > > Signed-off-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Remind me when did I Ack this version of your patch ..
> Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> > Cc: Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 2 ++ > drivers/cpufreq/arm_big_little.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > index 1582c1c..0e0052e 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm > @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ > config ARM_BIG_LITTLE_CPUFREQ > tristate "Generic ARM big LITTLE CPUfreq driver" > depends on (ARM_CPU_TOPOLOGY || ARM64) && HAVE_CLK > + # if CPU_THERMAL is on and THERMAL=m, ARM_BIT_LITTLE_CPUFREQ cannot be =y > + depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL > select PM_OPP > help > This enables the Generic CPUfreq driver for ARM big.LITTLE platforms. > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/arm_big_little.c b/drivers/cpufreq/arm_big_little.c > index c5d256c..60d09c0 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/arm_big_little.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/arm_big_little.c > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ > #include <linux/cpu.h> > #include <linux/cpufreq.h> > #include <linux/cpumask.h> > +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h> > #include <linux/export.h> > #include <linux/module.h> > #include <linux/mutex.h> > @@ -55,6 +56,7 @@ static bool bL_switching_enabled; > #define ACTUAL_FREQ(cluster, freq) ((cluster == A7_CLUSTER) ? freq << 1 : freq) > #define VIRT_FREQ(cluster, freq) ((cluster == A7_CLUSTER) ? freq >> 1 : freq) > > +static struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev[MAX_CLUSTERS]; > static struct cpufreq_arm_bL_ops *arm_bL_ops; > static struct clk *clk[MAX_CLUSTERS]; > static struct cpufreq_frequency_table *freq_table[MAX_CLUSTERS + 1]; > @@ -493,6 +495,7 @@ static int bL_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > static int bL_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > { > struct device *cpu_dev; > + int domain; > > cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(policy->cpu); > if (!cpu_dev) { > @@ -501,12 +504,43 @@ static int bL_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > return -ENODEV; > } > > + domain = topology_physical_package_id(cpu_dev->id);
And this is broken.
Have you tested this for IKS ? That's what the primary use-case of this driver is. And yeah, I would like to migrate the bL usecase to cpufreq-dt, now that it can support multiple clusters.
This is broken, because exit() might get called for a CPU from big cluster, while read() was called for a CPU on little cluster.
-- viresh
| |