Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | "Yuan, Perry" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH 1/7] cpufreq: amd-pstate: remove set_boost callback for passive mode | Date | Mon, 29 Jan 2024 04:46:52 +0000 |
| |
[AMD Official Use Only - General]
Hi Mario,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com> > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 11:45 PM > To: Yuan, Perry <Perry.Yuan@amd.com>; rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com; > viresh.kumar@linaro.org; Huang, Ray <Ray.Huang@amd.com>; Shenoy, > Gautham Ranjal <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>; Petkov, Borislav > <Borislav.Petkov@amd.com> > Cc: Deucher, Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@amd.com>; Huang, Shimmer > <Shimmer.Huang@amd.com>; Du, Xiaojian <Xiaojian.Du@amd.com>; Meng, > Li (Jassmine) <Li.Meng@amd.com>; linux-pm@vger.kernel.org; linux- > kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] cpufreq: amd-pstate: remove set_boost callback for > passive mode > > On 1/26/2024 02:08, Perry Yuan wrote: > > From: Perry Yuan <Perry.Yuan@amd.com> > > > > The following patches will enable `amd-pstate` CPU boost control > > method > When it's committed it won't be a patch. How about instead "A specific amd- > pstate CPU boost control method is to be introduced and the legacy callback > doesn't make sense" or something along those lines. > > Also; is the ordering correct? In terms of bisectability should this come after > the new one is introduced perhaps?
I move the patch to the end of the series and update the commit info like you suggested. Thank you for the feedback.
Regards. Perry
> > > which will not need this common boost control callback anymore, so we > > remove the legacy set_boost interface from amd-pstate driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Perry Yuan <Perry.Yuan@amd.com> > > --- > > drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c | 26 -------------------------- > > 1 file changed, 26 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c > > b/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c index 9a1e194d5cf8..8f308f56ade6 > 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c > > @@ -632,31 +632,6 @@ static int amd_get_lowest_nonlinear_freq(struct > amd_cpudata *cpudata) > > return lowest_nonlinear_freq * 1000; > > } > > > > -static int amd_pstate_set_boost(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, int > > state) -{ > > - struct amd_cpudata *cpudata = policy->driver_data; > > - int ret; > > - > > - if (!cpudata->boost_supported) { > > - pr_err("Boost mode is not supported by this processor or > SBIOS\n"); > > - return -EINVAL; > > - } > > - > > - if (state) > > - policy->cpuinfo.max_freq = cpudata->max_freq; > > - else > > - policy->cpuinfo.max_freq = cpudata->nominal_freq; > > - > > - policy->max = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq; > > - > > - ret = freq_qos_update_request(&cpudata->req[1], > > - policy->cpuinfo.max_freq); > > - if (ret < 0) > > - return ret; > > - > > - return 0; > > -} > > - > > static void amd_pstate_boost_init(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata) > > { > > u32 highest_perf, nominal_perf; > > @@ -1391,7 +1366,6 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver amd_pstate_driver = > { > > .exit = amd_pstate_cpu_exit, > > .suspend = amd_pstate_cpu_suspend, > > .resume = amd_pstate_cpu_resume, > > - .set_boost = amd_pstate_set_boost, > > .name = "amd-pstate", > > .attr = amd_pstate_attr, > > };
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |