Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC/RFT] [PATCH v2 3/6] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Add update_util_hook for HWP | From | Srinivas Pandruvada <> | Date | Tue, 29 May 2018 15:17:54 -0700 |
| |
On Tue, 2018-05-29 at 09:37 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada > <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > When HWP dynamic boost is active then set the HWP specific update > > util > > hook. > > > > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel > > .com> > > Splitting this patch out of the next one is sort of artificial. I will merge to the patch where the hwp_boost is getting used.
Thanks, Srinivas
> > > --- > > drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c > > b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c > > index 6ad46e07cad6..382160570b5f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c > > @@ -291,6 +291,7 @@ static struct pstate_funcs pstate_funcs > > __read_mostly; > > > > static int hwp_active __read_mostly; > > static bool per_cpu_limits __read_mostly; > > +static bool hwp_boost __read_mostly; > > Because of this, among other things. > > > > > static struct cpufreq_driver *intel_pstate_driver __read_mostly; > > > > @@ -1461,6 +1462,11 @@ static inline bool > > intel_pstate_hwp_boost_down(struct cpudata *cpu) > > return false; > > } > > > > +static inline void intel_pstate_update_util_hwp(struct > > update_util_data *data, > > + u64 time, unsigned > > int flags) > > +{ > > +} > > + > > static inline void intel_pstate_calc_avg_perf(struct cpudata *cpu) > > { > > struct sample *sample = &cpu->sample; > > @@ -1764,7 +1770,7 @@ static void > > intel_pstate_set_update_util_hook(unsigned int cpu_num) > > { > > struct cpudata *cpu = all_cpu_data[cpu_num]; > > > > - if (hwp_active) > > + if (hwp_active && !hwp_boost) > > return; > > > > if (cpu->update_util_set) > > @@ -1772,8 +1778,12 @@ static void > > intel_pstate_set_update_util_hook(unsigned int cpu_num) > > > > /* Prevent intel_pstate_update_util() from using stale > > data. */ > > cpu->sample.time = 0; > > - cpufreq_add_update_util_hook(cpu_num, &cpu->update_util, > > - intel_pstate_update_util); > > + if (hwp_active) > > + cpufreq_add_update_util_hook(cpu_num, &cpu- > > >update_util, > > + intel_pstate_update_ut > > il_hwp); > > + else > > + cpufreq_add_update_util_hook(cpu_num, &cpu- > > >update_util, > > + intel_pstate_update_ut > > il); > > cpu->update_util_set = true; > > } > > > > @@ -1885,8 +1895,11 @@ static int intel_pstate_set_policy(struct > > cpufreq_policy *policy) > > intel_pstate_set_update_util_hook(policy->cpu); > > } > > > > - if (hwp_active) > > + if (hwp_active) { > > + if (!hwp_boost) > > + intel_pstate_clear_update_util_hook(policy- > > >cpu); > > intel_pstate_hwp_set(policy->cpu); > > + } > > > > mutex_unlock(&intel_pstate_limits_lock); > > > > -- > > 2.13.6 > >
| |