All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	rob.herring@linaro.org, nm@ti.com,
	linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	arnd.bergmann@linaro.org, broonie@kernel.org,
	mike.turquette@linaro.org, Sudeep.Holla@arm.com,
	viswanath.puttagunta@linaro.org, l.stach@pengutronix.de,
	thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ta.omasab@gmail.com,
	kesavan.abhilash@gmail.com, khilman@linaro.org,
	santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] opp: Add support to parse "operating-points-v2" bindings
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 12:08:20 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150702063820.GE31684@linux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55949037.80305@codeaurora.org>

On 01-07-15, 18:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 06/15/2015 04:57 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > ---
> >  drivers/base/power/opp.c | 238 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 213 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/power/opp.c b/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> > index 2ac48ff9c1ef..3198c3e77224 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> > @@ -49,12 +49,17 @@
> >   *		are protected by the dev_opp_list_lock for integrity.
> >   *		IMPORTANT: the opp nodes should be maintained in increasing
> >   *		order.
> > - * @dynamic:	not-created from static DT entries.
> >   * @available:	true/false - marks if this OPP as available or not
> > + * @dynamic:	not-created from static DT entries.
> 
> Why move dynamic?

To match its position, as it is present in the struct below. Yes it
could have been done in a separate patch, but its also fine to fix
such silly mistakes in another patch :)

> > + * @turbo:	true if turbo (boost) OPP
> >   * @rate:	Frequency in hertz
> > - * @u_volt:	Nominal voltage in microvolts corresponding to this OPP
> > + * @u_volt:	Target voltage in microvolts corresponding to this OPP
> > + * @u_volt_min:	Minimum voltage in microvolts corresponding to this OPP
> > + * @u_volt_max:	Maximum voltage in microvolts corresponding to this OPP
> > + * @u_amp:	Maximum current drawn by the device in microamperes
> >   * @dev_opp:	points back to the device_opp struct this opp belongs to
> >   * @rcu_head:	RCU callback head used for deferred freeing
> > + * @np:		OPP's device node.
> >   *
> >   * This structure stores the OPP information for a given device.
> >   */
> > @@ -63,11 +68,22 @@ struct dev_pm_opp {
> >  
> >  	bool available;
> >  	bool dynamic;
> > +	bool turbo;
> >  	unsigned long rate;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Order in which u_volt{_min|_max} are present in this structure
> > +	 * shouldn't be changed.
> > +	 */
> >  	unsigned long u_volt;
> > +	unsigned long u_volt_min;
> > +	unsigned long u_volt_max;
> > +	unsigned long u_amp;
> >  
> >  	struct device_opp *dev_opp;
> >  	struct rcu_head rcu_head;
> > +
> > +	struct device_node *np;
> >  };
> >  
> >  /**
> > @@ -501,6 +517,7 @@ static void _opp_remove(struct device_opp *dev_opp,
> >  	 */
> >  	if (notify)
> >  		srcu_notifier_call_chain(&dev_opp->srcu_head, OPP_EVENT_REMOVE, opp);
> > +
> >  	list_del_rcu(&opp->node);
> >  	call_srcu(&dev_opp->srcu_head.srcu, &opp->rcu_head, _kfree_opp_rcu);
> >  
> 
> Please remove this hunk of noise.

Sigh

> > @@ -675,6 +692,100 @@ static int _opp_add_dynamic(struct device *dev, unsigned long freq,
> >  }
> >  
> >  /**
> > + * _opp_add_static_v2() - Allocate static OPPs (As per 'v2' DT bindings)
> > + * @dev:	device for which we do this operation
> > + * @np:		device node
> > + *
> > + * This function adds an opp definition to the opp list and returns status. The
> > + * opp can be controlled using dev_pm_opp_enable/disable functions and may be
> > + * removed by dev_pm_opp_remove.
> > + *
> > + * Locking: The internal device_opp and opp structures are RCU protected.
> > + * Hence this function internally uses RCU updater strategy with mutex locks
> > + * to keep the integrity of the internal data structures. Callers should ensure
> > + * that this function is *NOT* called under RCU protection or in contexts where
> > + * mutex cannot be locked.
> > + *
> > + * Return:
> > + * 0		On success OR
> > + *		Duplicate OPPs (both freq and volt are same) and opp->available
> > + * -EEXIST	Freq are same and volt are different OR
> > + *		Duplicate OPPs (both freq and volt are same) and !opp->available
> > + * -ENOMEM	Memory allocation failure
> > + * -EINVAL	Failed parsing the OPP node
> > + */
> > +static int _opp_add_static_v2(struct device *dev, struct device_node *np)
> > +{
> > +	struct device_opp *dev_opp;
> > +	struct dev_pm_opp *new_opp;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	/* Hold our list modification lock here */
> > +	mutex_lock(&dev_opp_list_lock);
> > +
> > +	new_opp = _allocate_opp(dev, &dev_opp);
> > +	if (!new_opp) {
> > +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> > +		goto unlock;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "opp-hz", (u32 *)&new_opp->rate);
> > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "%s: opp-hz not found\n", __func__);
> > +		goto free_opp;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (of_get_property(np, "turbo-mode", NULL))
> > +		new_opp->turbo = true;
> 
> new_opp->turbo = of_property_read_bool(np, "turbo-mode");

Sure.

> > +
> > +	new_opp->np = np;
> > +	new_opp->dynamic = false;
> > +	new_opp->available = true;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * TODO: Support multiple regulators
> > +	 *
> > +	 * read opp-microvolt array
> > +	 */
> > +	ret = of_property_count_u32_elems(np, "opp-microvolt");
> > +	if (ret == 1 || ret == 3) {
> > +		/* There can be one or three elements here */
> > +		ret = of_property_read_u32_array(np, "opp-microvolt",
> > +						 (u32 *)&new_opp->u_volt, ret);
> 
> It seems fragile to rely on the struct packing here. Maybe the same
> comment in the struct should be copied here, and possibly some better
> way of doing this so the code can't be subtly broken?

Any example of how things will break? Aren't these guaranteed to be
present at 3 consecutive 32 bit positions ?

> > +
> > +	pr_debug("%s: turbo:%d rate:%lu uv:%lu uvmin:%lu uvmax:%lu\n",
> > +		 __func__, new_opp->turbo, new_opp->rate, new_opp->u_volt,
> > +		 new_opp->u_volt_min, new_opp->u_volt_max);
> > +
> > +	mutex_unlock(&dev_opp_list_lock);
> 
> We can pr_debug after the unlock?

Okay

-- 
viresh

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 05/10] opp: Add support to parse "operating-points-v2" bindings
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 12:08:20 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150702063820.GE31684@linux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55949037.80305@codeaurora.org>

On 01-07-15, 18:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 06/15/2015 04:57 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > ---
> >  drivers/base/power/opp.c | 238 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 213 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/power/opp.c b/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> > index 2ac48ff9c1ef..3198c3e77224 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> > @@ -49,12 +49,17 @@
> >   *		are protected by the dev_opp_list_lock for integrity.
> >   *		IMPORTANT: the opp nodes should be maintained in increasing
> >   *		order.
> > - * @dynamic:	not-created from static DT entries.
> >   * @available:	true/false - marks if this OPP as available or not
> > + * @dynamic:	not-created from static DT entries.
> 
> Why move dynamic?

To match its position, as it is present in the struct below. Yes it
could have been done in a separate patch, but its also fine to fix
such silly mistakes in another patch :)

> > + * @turbo:	true if turbo (boost) OPP
> >   * @rate:	Frequency in hertz
> > - * @u_volt:	Nominal voltage in microvolts corresponding to this OPP
> > + * @u_volt:	Target voltage in microvolts corresponding to this OPP
> > + * @u_volt_min:	Minimum voltage in microvolts corresponding to this OPP
> > + * @u_volt_max:	Maximum voltage in microvolts corresponding to this OPP
> > + * @u_amp:	Maximum current drawn by the device in microamperes
> >   * @dev_opp:	points back to the device_opp struct this opp belongs to
> >   * @rcu_head:	RCU callback head used for deferred freeing
> > + * @np:		OPP's device node.
> >   *
> >   * This structure stores the OPP information for a given device.
> >   */
> > @@ -63,11 +68,22 @@ struct dev_pm_opp {
> >  
> >  	bool available;
> >  	bool dynamic;
> > +	bool turbo;
> >  	unsigned long rate;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Order in which u_volt{_min|_max} are present in this structure
> > +	 * shouldn't be changed.
> > +	 */
> >  	unsigned long u_volt;
> > +	unsigned long u_volt_min;
> > +	unsigned long u_volt_max;
> > +	unsigned long u_amp;
> >  
> >  	struct device_opp *dev_opp;
> >  	struct rcu_head rcu_head;
> > +
> > +	struct device_node *np;
> >  };
> >  
> >  /**
> > @@ -501,6 +517,7 @@ static void _opp_remove(struct device_opp *dev_opp,
> >  	 */
> >  	if (notify)
> >  		srcu_notifier_call_chain(&dev_opp->srcu_head, OPP_EVENT_REMOVE, opp);
> > +
> >  	list_del_rcu(&opp->node);
> >  	call_srcu(&dev_opp->srcu_head.srcu, &opp->rcu_head, _kfree_opp_rcu);
> >  
> 
> Please remove this hunk of noise.

Sigh

> > @@ -675,6 +692,100 @@ static int _opp_add_dynamic(struct device *dev, unsigned long freq,
> >  }
> >  
> >  /**
> > + * _opp_add_static_v2() - Allocate static OPPs (As per 'v2' DT bindings)
> > + * @dev:	device for which we do this operation
> > + * @np:		device node
> > + *
> > + * This function adds an opp definition to the opp list and returns status. The
> > + * opp can be controlled using dev_pm_opp_enable/disable functions and may be
> > + * removed by dev_pm_opp_remove.
> > + *
> > + * Locking: The internal device_opp and opp structures are RCU protected.
> > + * Hence this function internally uses RCU updater strategy with mutex locks
> > + * to keep the integrity of the internal data structures. Callers should ensure
> > + * that this function is *NOT* called under RCU protection or in contexts where
> > + * mutex cannot be locked.
> > + *
> > + * Return:
> > + * 0		On success OR
> > + *		Duplicate OPPs (both freq and volt are same) and opp->available
> > + * -EEXIST	Freq are same and volt are different OR
> > + *		Duplicate OPPs (both freq and volt are same) and !opp->available
> > + * -ENOMEM	Memory allocation failure
> > + * -EINVAL	Failed parsing the OPP node
> > + */
> > +static int _opp_add_static_v2(struct device *dev, struct device_node *np)
> > +{
> > +	struct device_opp *dev_opp;
> > +	struct dev_pm_opp *new_opp;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	/* Hold our list modification lock here */
> > +	mutex_lock(&dev_opp_list_lock);
> > +
> > +	new_opp = _allocate_opp(dev, &dev_opp);
> > +	if (!new_opp) {
> > +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> > +		goto unlock;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "opp-hz", (u32 *)&new_opp->rate);
> > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "%s: opp-hz not found\n", __func__);
> > +		goto free_opp;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (of_get_property(np, "turbo-mode", NULL))
> > +		new_opp->turbo = true;
> 
> new_opp->turbo = of_property_read_bool(np, "turbo-mode");

Sure.

> > +
> > +	new_opp->np = np;
> > +	new_opp->dynamic = false;
> > +	new_opp->available = true;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * TODO: Support multiple regulators
> > +	 *
> > +	 * read opp-microvolt array
> > +	 */
> > +	ret = of_property_count_u32_elems(np, "opp-microvolt");
> > +	if (ret == 1 || ret == 3) {
> > +		/* There can be one or three elements here */
> > +		ret = of_property_read_u32_array(np, "opp-microvolt",
> > +						 (u32 *)&new_opp->u_volt, ret);
> 
> It seems fragile to rely on the struct packing here. Maybe the same
> comment in the struct should be copied here, and possibly some better
> way of doing this so the code can't be subtly broken?

Any example of how things will break? Aren't these guaranteed to be
present at 3 consecutive 32 bit positions ?

> > +
> > +	pr_debug("%s: turbo:%d rate:%lu uv:%lu uvmin:%lu uvmax:%lu\n",
> > +		 __func__, new_opp->turbo, new_opp->rate, new_opp->u_volt,
> > +		 new_opp->u_volt_min, new_opp->u_volt_max);
> > +
> > +	mutex_unlock(&dev_opp_list_lock);
> 
> We can pr_debug after the unlock?

Okay

-- 
viresh

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-02  6:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 94+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-15 11:57 [PATCH 00/10] OPP: Add code to support operating-points-v2 bindings Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 01/10] opp: Relocate few routines Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-02  1:25   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02  1:25     ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-24 17:08   ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-24 17:08     ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 02/10] OPP: Create _remove_device_opp() for freeing dev_opp Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-02  1:25   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02  1:25     ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-24 17:13   ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-24 17:13     ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 03/10] OPP: Allocate dev_opp from _add_device_opp() Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-02  1:02   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02  1:02     ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02  6:24     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-02  6:24       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-02 23:46       ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02 23:46         ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-03  6:45         ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-03  6:45           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-06 22:31           ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-06 22:31             ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-24 17:25           ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-24 17:25             ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 04/10] OPP: Break _opp_add_dynamic() into smaller functions Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-24 17:42   ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-24 17:42     ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 05/10] opp: Add support to parse "operating-points-v2" bindings Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-02  1:13   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02  1:13     ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02  6:38     ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2015-07-02  6:38       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-02 16:07       ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02 16:07         ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-03  6:08         ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-03  6:08           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-08 13:41   ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-08 13:41     ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-09  5:18     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-09  5:18       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-24 18:02       ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-24 18:02         ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-27  3:14         ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27  3:14           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27  3:02     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27  3:02       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-28 23:03       ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-28 23:03         ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-29  6:53         ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29  6:53           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-30 10:17         ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-30 10:17           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 06/10] OPP: Add clock-latency-ns support Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-02  1:27   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-02  1:27     ` Stephen Boyd
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 07/10] opp: Add OPP sharing information to OPP library Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-17 22:51   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-17 22:51     ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-18  6:33     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-18  6:33       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-20 17:46       ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-20 17:46         ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-21  2:18         ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-21  2:18           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27  3:20         ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27  3:20           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 08/10] OPP: Add support for opp-suspend Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-17 19:22   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-17 19:22     ` Stephen Boyd
2015-07-18  6:32     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-18  6:32       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 09/10] opp: Add helpers for initializing CPU OPPs Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57 ` [PATCH 10/10] cpufreq-dt: Add support for operating-points-v2 bindings Viresh Kumar
2015-06-15 11:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-09 16:13   ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-09 16:13     ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-09 16:44     ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-09 16:44       ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2015-07-15  2:59     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-15  2:59       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-30 16:44 ` [PATCH 00/10] OPP: Add code to support " Viresh Kumar
2015-06-30 16:44   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-17  2:36   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-17  2:36     ` Viresh Kumar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150702063820.GE31684@linux \
    --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=Sudeep.Holla@arm.com \
    --cc=arnd.bergmann@linaro.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=kesavan.abhilash@gmail.com \
    --cc=khilman@linaro.org \
    --cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mike.turquette@linaro.org \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=rob.herring@linaro.org \
    --cc=santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=ta.omasab@gmail.com \
    --cc=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=viswanath.puttagunta@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.