From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, pdsw-power-team@arm.com, arvind.chauhan@arm.com Subject: Re: [RFC] cpufreq: Make sure target freq is within limits Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:23:28 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <2173527.XVCDQtU61N@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw) In-Reply-To: <f0099171c1c4f3048d0f29b7deb42144f26ac5d5.1351146515.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:03:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > __cpufreq_driver_target() must not pass target frequency beyond the limits of > current policy. > > Today most of cpufreq platform drivers are doing this check in their target > routines. Why not move it to __cpufreq_driver_target(). > > I wanted to get your opinion on this before making changes in all driver files. > That's why this is an RFC. I'd prefer to apply the patch below before changing the drviers. Thanks, Rafael > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 11 +++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > index f552d5f..59264f1 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > @@ -1470,12 +1470,19 @@ int __cpufreq_driver_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, > unsigned int relation) > { > int retval = -EINVAL; > + unsigned int old_target_freq = target_freq; > > if (cpufreq_disabled()) > return -ENODEV; > > - pr_debug("target for CPU %u: %u kHz, relation %u\n", policy->cpu, > - target_freq, relation); > + /* Make sure that target_freq is within supported range */ > + if (target_freq > policy->max) > + target_freq = policy->max; > + if (target_freq < policy->min) > + target_freq = policy->min; > + > + pr_debug("target for CPU %u: %u kHz, relation %u, requested %u kHz\n", > + policy->cpu, target_freq, relation, old_target_freq); > if (cpu_online(policy->cpu) && cpufreq_driver->target) > retval = cpufreq_driver->target(policy, target_freq, relation); > > -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: rjw@sisk.pl (Rafael J. Wysocki) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [RFC] cpufreq: Make sure target freq is within limits Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:23:28 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <2173527.XVCDQtU61N@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw) In-Reply-To: <f0099171c1c4f3048d0f29b7deb42144f26ac5d5.1351146515.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:03:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > __cpufreq_driver_target() must not pass target frequency beyond the limits of > current policy. > > Today most of cpufreq platform drivers are doing this check in their target > routines. Why not move it to __cpufreq_driver_target(). > > I wanted to get your opinion on this before making changes in all driver files. > That's why this is an RFC. I'd prefer to apply the patch below before changing the drviers. Thanks, Rafael > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 11 +++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > index f552d5f..59264f1 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > @@ -1470,12 +1470,19 @@ int __cpufreq_driver_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, > unsigned int relation) > { > int retval = -EINVAL; > + unsigned int old_target_freq = target_freq; > > if (cpufreq_disabled()) > return -ENODEV; > > - pr_debug("target for CPU %u: %u kHz, relation %u\n", policy->cpu, > - target_freq, relation); > + /* Make sure that target_freq is within supported range */ > + if (target_freq > policy->max) > + target_freq = policy->max; > + if (target_freq < policy->min) > + target_freq = policy->min; > + > + pr_debug("target for CPU %u: %u kHz, relation %u, requested %u kHz\n", > + policy->cpu, target_freq, relation, old_target_freq); > if (cpu_online(policy->cpu) && cpufreq_driver->target) > retval = cpufreq_driver->target(policy, target_freq, relation); > > -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-26 11:19 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2012-10-25 6:33 [RFC] cpufreq: Make sure target freq is within limits Viresh Kumar 2012-10-25 6:33 ` Viresh Kumar 2012-10-25 6:33 ` Viresh Kumar 2012-10-26 11:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message] 2012-10-26 11:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=2173527.XVCDQtU61N@vostro.rjw.lan \ --to=rjw@sisk.pl \ --cc=arvind.chauhan@arm.com \ --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=patches@linaro.org \ --cc=pdsw-power-team@arm.com \ --cc=viresh.kumar@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: linkBe 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.