Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: vexpress-spc: Fix wrong alternation of policy->related_cpus during CPU hp | From | Dietmar Eggemann <> | Date | Thu, 28 Nov 2019 11:01:43 +0100 |
| |
On 28/11/2019 03:31, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 27-11-19, 15:40, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> diff --git i/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c w/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c >> index 354e0e7025ae..e0e2e789a0b7 100644 >> --- i/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c >> +++ w/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c >> @@ -551,8 +551,9 @@ static struct clk *ve_spc_clk_register(struct device *cpu_dev) >> >> static int __init ve_spc_clk_init(void) >> { >> - int cpu; >> + int cpu, cluster; >> struct clk *clk; >> + bool init_opp_table[MAX_CLUSTERS] = { false }; >> >> if (!info) >> return 0; /* Continue only if SPC is initialised */ >> @@ -578,8 +579,17 @@ static int __init ve_spc_clk_init(void) >> continue; >> } >> >> + cluster = topology_physical_package_id(cpu_dev->id); >> + if (init_opp_table[cluster]) >> + continue; >> + >> if (ve_init_opp_table(cpu_dev)) >> pr_warn("failed to initialise cpu%d opp table\n", cpu); >> + else if (dev_pm_opp_set_sharing_cpus(cpu_dev, >> + topology_core_cpumask(cpu_dev->id))) >> + pr_warn("failed to mark OPPs shared for cpu%d\n", cpu); >> + >> + init_opp_table[cluster] = true; >> } >> >> platform_device_register_simple("vexpress-spc-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); >> diff --git i/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress-spc-cpufreq.c w/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress-spc-cpufreq.c >> index 506e3f2bf53a..83c85d3d67e3 100644 >> --- i/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress-spc-cpufreq.c >> +++ w/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress-spc-cpufreq.c >> @@ -434,7 +434,7 @@ static int ve_spc_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) >> if (cur_cluster < MAX_CLUSTERS) { >> int cpu; >> >> - cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, topology_core_cpumask(policy->cpu)); >> + dev_pm_opp_get_sharing_cpus(cpu_dev, policy->cpus); >> >> for_each_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus) >> per_cpu(physical_cluster, cpu) = cur_cluster; > > This is a better *work-around* I would say, as we can't break it the > way I explained earlier :)
I do agree. Tested CPU hp stress on TC2 and it looks good.
Tested-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
| |