lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: mediatek: Register an Energy Model
Hi Quentin,

On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:13:18AM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On Tuesday 05 Feb 2019 at 09:52:25 (-0800), Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > Try and register an Energy Model from mediatek-cpufreq to allow
> > interested subsystems like the task scheduler to use the provided
> > information.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> > index eb8920d398181..e6168ee582783 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> > @@ -460,6 +460,8 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > + dev_pm_opp_of_register_em(policy->cpus);
>
> I'm not familiar with the mediatek-cpufreq driver so bear with me, but
> the code sets policy->cpus just below here. Is there any particular
> reason for not using that in PM_EM ?

You are prefectly right, I missed the obvious and didn't get my hands
on hardware yet for testing.

So much for screwing up a one-liner ... I'll send a fix.

I thought Viresh already applied the patch, however in opp/linux-next
I currently only see the other one of this series for qcom-hw, so it
seems sending a new version rather than a fix-up patch is the way to
go.

Thanks for the review!

> > cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, &info->cpus);
> > policy->freq_table = freq_table;
> > policy->driver_data = info;
>
> Thanks,
> Quentin
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-06 19:17    [W:0.180 / U:0.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site