lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 19/24] PM / devfreq: tegra30: Optimize upper consecutive watermark selection
From
Date
On 19. 7. 19. 오전 10:15, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 19. 7. 19. 오전 9:40, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> В Thu, 18 Jul 2019 18:51:02 +0900
>> Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com> пишет:
>>
>>> On 19. 7. 8. 오전 7:32, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>>> The memory activity counter may get a bit higher than a watermark
>>>> which is selected based on OPP that corresponds to a highest EMC
>>>> rate, in this case watermark is lower than the actual memory
>>>> activity is and thus results in unwanted "upper" interrupts.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/devfreq/tegra30-devfreq.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
>>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> It seems that you can combine patch19 with patch20.
>>
>> No, consecutive and average watermarks are different things that have
>> different purposes. Consecutive are used for boosting, while average
>> are for significant memory bandwidth changes.
>>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/tegra30-devfreq.c
>>>> b/drivers/devfreq/tegra30-devfreq.c index
>>>> 8d6bf6e9f1ae..c3cf87231d25 100644 ---
>>>> a/drivers/devfreq/tegra30-devfreq.c +++
>>>> b/drivers/devfreq/tegra30-devfreq.c @@ -363,7 +363,18 @@ static
>>>> void tegra_devfreq_update_wmark(struct tegra_devfreq *tegra,
>>>> tegra_actmon_get_lower_upper(tegra, dev, freq - 1, &lower, &upper);
>>>> delta = do_percent(upper - lower,
>>>> dev->config->boost_up_threshold);
>>>> - device_writel(dev, lower + delta, ACTMON_DEV_UPPER_WMARK);
>
> This line was added on patch5 and then this line is removed on this patch.
> It is wrong method to make the patch in the same patchset.
>
> It is enough to reduce the inefficient add/remove code in the same patchset.

I'm missing some expression. So, I update my comment as following:
It is possible to reduce the inefficient add/remove code in the same patchset
if you combine the patches.

>
> Have to merge this patch to patch5.
>
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * The memory events count could go a bit higher than the
>>>> maximum
>>>> + * defined by the OPPs, hence make the upper watermark
>>>> infinitely
>>>> + * high to avoid unnecessary upper interrupts in that case.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (freq == tegra->max_freq)
>>>> + upper = ULONG_MAX;
>>>> + else
>>>> + upper = lower + delta;
>>>> +
>>>> + device_writel(dev, upper, ACTMON_DEV_UPPER_WMARK);
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> * Meanwhile the lower mark is based on the average value
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-19 03:15    [W:0.073 / U:8.628 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site