* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-25 8:14 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-03-25 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew-sh.Cheng, MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring,
Mark Rutland, Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown
Cc: linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
Please update the email or drop this email.
On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>
> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>
> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> current CPU frequency.
>
> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> following:
> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> the parent cpu opp_table.
>
> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> in between.
>
> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> after kernel-5.7
> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> ---
> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>
> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>
> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> */
>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> #include <linux/device.h>
> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> #include "governor.h"
>
> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> + unsigned int curr_freq;
> + unsigned int min_freq;
> + unsigned int max_freq;
> + unsigned int first_cpu;
> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> +};
As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
as following: I wan to add the description like below.
And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
/**
* struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
* @dev: reference to cpu device.
* @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
* @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
* @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
* @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
* @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
*
* This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
* This is auto-populated by the governor.
*/
struct devfreq_cpu_state {
struct device *dev;
unsigned int first_cpu;
struct opp_table *opp_table;
unsigned int cur_freq;
unsigned int min_freq;
unsigned int max_freq;
};
> +
> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> + unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> +
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> +
> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> + return 0;
> +
> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> + return 0;
> +
> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> +
> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> +
> + if (dev_freq_table) {
> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> + } else {
> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> + }
> + } else {
> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> +
> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> + return 0;
> + }
> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> +
> +out:
> + return freq;
> +}
> +
> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> + unsigned long *freq)
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> +
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> +
> + *freq = target_freq;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
[2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf
For example but this code is not tested,
static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
struct opp_table *opp_table,
unsigned long freq)
{
struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
return 0;
p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
return 0;
opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
if (IS_ERR(opp))
return 0;
freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
return freq;
}
static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
unsigned long *target_freq)
{
struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
(struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
unsigned long freq = 0;
for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
continue;
/* Get target freq via required opps */
cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
cpu_data->opp_table,
devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
if (freq) {
*target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
continue;
}
/* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
*target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
}
return 0;
}
> +
> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned long *freq)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> int i, count;
>
> /*
> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> - */
> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> -
> - /*
> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> */
> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> + unsigned long *freq)
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> + int ret;
> +
> + /*
> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> + */
> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> +
> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> + break;
> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> + break;
> + default:
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> {
> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> return NOTIFY_DONE;
> }
>
> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
> + unsigned int curr_freq;
As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
if there is no any special reason.
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> + return 0;
> +
> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> + return 0;
> +
> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
as following:
devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> + if (ret) {
> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
please change the name as following because devfreq defines
the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
- cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + int ret;
> +
> + get_online_cpus();
> +
> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> + continue;
> +
> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> + if (!policy) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> + goto out;
> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> + goto out;
> + }
Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
It make code more simple.
> +
> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!cpu_state) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> + if (!cpu_dev) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> + ret = -ENODEV;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> +
> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> + }
> +
> +out:
> + put_online_cpus();
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + /* Update devfreq */
> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
As I commented above, please change the name as following:
- cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> + int cpu;
> +
> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> +
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> + if (cpu_state) {
> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> + kfree(cpu_state);
> + cpu_state = NULL;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> +{
> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> + break;
> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> + break;
> + default:
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> + &(*p_data)->nb,
> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> + break;
> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> + break;
> + default:
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
> +
> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned int event, void *data)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> int ret = 0;
>
> - if (!parent)
> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>
> switch (event) {
> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> if (!p_data->this)
> p_data->this = devfreq;
>
> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> break;
> +
> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> break;
> default:
> break;
> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> /**
> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> + *
> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> + */
> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> +
> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> +};
> +
> +/**
> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> * and devfreq_add_device
> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> * using governors except for passive governor.
> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> *
> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> - * them.
> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> + * will handle them.
> */
> struct devfreq_passive_data {
> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>
> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> +
> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> struct devfreq *this;
> struct notifier_block nb;
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> };
> #endif
>
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-25 8:14 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-03-25 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew-sh.Cheng, MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring,
Mark Rutland, Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown
Cc: linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
Please update the email or drop this email.
On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>
> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>
> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> current CPU frequency.
>
> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> following:
> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> the parent cpu opp_table.
>
> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> in between.
>
> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> after kernel-5.7
> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> ---
> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>
> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>
> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> */
>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> #include <linux/device.h>
> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> #include "governor.h"
>
> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> + unsigned int curr_freq;
> + unsigned int min_freq;
> + unsigned int max_freq;
> + unsigned int first_cpu;
> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> +};
As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
as following: I wan to add the description like below.
And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
/**
* struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
* @dev: reference to cpu device.
* @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
* @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
* @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
* @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
* @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
*
* This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
* This is auto-populated by the governor.
*/
struct devfreq_cpu_state {
struct device *dev;
unsigned int first_cpu;
struct opp_table *opp_table;
unsigned int cur_freq;
unsigned int min_freq;
unsigned int max_freq;
};
> +
> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> + unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> +
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> +
> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> + return 0;
> +
> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> + return 0;
> +
> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> +
> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> +
> + if (dev_freq_table) {
> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> + } else {
> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> + }
> + } else {
> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> +
> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> + return 0;
> + }
> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> +
> +out:
> + return freq;
> +}
> +
> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> + unsigned long *freq)
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> +
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> +
> + *freq = target_freq;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
[2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf
For example but this code is not tested,
static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
struct opp_table *opp_table,
unsigned long freq)
{
struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
return 0;
p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
return 0;
opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
if (IS_ERR(opp))
return 0;
freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
return freq;
}
static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
unsigned long *target_freq)
{
struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
(struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
unsigned long freq = 0;
for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
continue;
/* Get target freq via required opps */
cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
cpu_data->opp_table,
devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
if (freq) {
*target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
continue;
}
/* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
*target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
}
return 0;
}
> +
> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned long *freq)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> int i, count;
>
> /*
> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> - */
> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> -
> - /*
> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> */
> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> + unsigned long *freq)
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> + int ret;
> +
> + /*
> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> + */
> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> +
> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> + break;
> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> + break;
> + default:
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> {
> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> return NOTIFY_DONE;
> }
>
> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
> + unsigned int curr_freq;
As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
if there is no any special reason.
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> + return 0;
> +
> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> + return 0;
> +
> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
as following:
devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> + if (ret) {
> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
please change the name as following because devfreq defines
the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
- cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + int ret;
> +
> + get_online_cpus();
> +
> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> + continue;
> +
> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> + if (!policy) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> + goto out;
> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> + goto out;
> + }
Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
It make code more simple.
> +
> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!cpu_state) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> + if (!cpu_dev) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> + ret = -ENODEV;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> +
> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> + }
> +
> +out:
> + put_online_cpus();
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + /* Update devfreq */
> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
As I commented above, please change the name as following:
- cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
> +{
> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> + int cpu;
> +
> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> +
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> + if (cpu_state) {
> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> + kfree(cpu_state);
> + cpu_state = NULL;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> +{
> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> + break;
> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> + break;
> + default:
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> + &(*p_data)->nb,
> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> + break;
> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> + break;
> + default:
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
> +
> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned int event, void *data)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> int ret = 0;
>
> - if (!parent)
> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>
> switch (event) {
> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> if (!p_data->this)
> p_data->this = devfreq;
>
> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> break;
> +
> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> break;
> default:
> break;
> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> /**
> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> + *
> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> + */
> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> +
> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> +};
> +
> +/**
> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> * and devfreq_add_device
> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> * using governors except for passive governor.
> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> *
> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> - * them.
> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> + * will handle them.
> */
> struct devfreq_passive_data {
> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>
> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> +
> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> struct devfreq *this;
> struct notifier_block nb;
> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> };
> #endif
>
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-03-25 8:14 ` Chanwoo Choi
@ 2021-03-31 8:03 ` andrew-sh.cheng
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-03-31 8:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>
> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>
> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> Please update the email or drop this email.
Hi Chanwoo,
Thank you for the advices.
I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
that my patch set base on
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
>
>
> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> > From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> > CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> > cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> > power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
> >
> > To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> > passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> > of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> > (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> > to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> > current CPU frequency.
> >
> > To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> > following:
> > * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> > the parent cpu opp_table.
> >
> > * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> > the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> > max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> > device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> > in between.
> >
> > Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> > dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> > to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> > after kernel-5.7
> > Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> > since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> > [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> > drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> > 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> > device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> > through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> > devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> > + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> > + the online CPUs current frequency.
> >
> > comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> > */
> >
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> > #include <linux/device.h>
> > #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > #include "governor.h"
> >
> > -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
> > + unsigned int min_freq;
> > + unsigned int max_freq;
> > + unsigned int first_cpu;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> > +};
>
> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>
> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>
> /**
> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> *
> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> */
> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> struct device *dev;
> unsigned int first_cpu;
>
> struct opp_table *opp_table;
> unsigned int cur_freq;
> unsigned int min_freq;
> unsigned int max_freq;
> };
>
>
> > +
> > +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> > + unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> > + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> > +
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> > + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> > + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> > +
> > + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> > + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> > + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> > + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> > + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> > +
> > + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> > + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> > + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> > + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> > + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > +
> > + if (dev_freq_table) {
> > + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> > + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> > + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> > +
> > + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
> > + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> > +
> > +out:
> > + return freq;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> > +
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> > + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> > + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> > +
> > + *freq = target_freq;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>
> For example but this code is not tested,
> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
> struct opp_table *opp_table,
> unsigned long freq)
> {
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>
> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
> return 0;
>
> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> return 0;
>
> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>
> if (IS_ERR(opp))
> return 0;
>
> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>
> return freq;
> }
>
> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned long *target_freq)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
> unsigned long freq = 0;
>
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
> continue;
>
> /* Get target freq via required opps */
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
> cpu_data->opp_table,
> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
> if (freq) {
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> continue;
> }
>
> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>
> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>
> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned long *freq)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > int i, count;
> >
> > /*
> > - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > - */
> > - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > -
> > - /*
> > * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> > * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> > */
> > @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > + */
> > + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > +
> > + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > {
> > @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> > + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>
> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
>
> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> if there is no any special reason.
>
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> > + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>
> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>
> > + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
> as following:
> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + get_online_cpus();
> > +
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>
> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> > + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> > + if (!policy) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> > + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> > + goto out;
> > + }
>
> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
> It make code more simple.
>
> > +
> > + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!cpu_state) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> > + if (!cpu_dev) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> > + ret = -ENODEV;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> > + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> > + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> > + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> > + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> > + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> > + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> > +
> > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> > + }
> > +
> > +out:
> > + put_online_cpus();
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* Update devfreq */
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret)
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + int cpu;
> > +
> > + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> > + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > +
> > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state) {
> > + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> > + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> > + kfree(cpu_state);
> > + cpu_state = NULL;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> > + &(*p_data)->nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>
> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>
>
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned int event, void *data)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> > - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > - if (!parent)
> > + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> > return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >
> > switch (event) {
> > @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > if (!p_data->this)
> > p_data->this = devfreq;
> >
> > - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > +
> > case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > default:
> > break;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> > /**
> > + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> > + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> > + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> > + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> > + *
> > + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> > + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> > + */
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> > +
> > +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> > + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > +};
> > +
> > +/**
> > * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> > * and devfreq_add_device
> > * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> > @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> > * using governors except for passive governor.
> > * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> > * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> > + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> > * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> > * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> > + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> > *
> > * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> > * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> > - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> > - * them.
> > + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> > + * will handle them.
> > */
> > struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> > @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> > int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
> >
> > + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> > + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> > +
> > /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> > struct devfreq *this;
> > struct notifier_block nb;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-31 8:03 ` andrew-sh.cheng
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-03-31 8:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>
> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>
> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> Please update the email or drop this email.
Hi Chanwoo,
Thank you for the advices.
I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
that my patch set base on
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
>
>
> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> > From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> > CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> > cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> > power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
> >
> > To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> > passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> > of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> > (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> > to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> > current CPU frequency.
> >
> > To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> > following:
> > * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> > the parent cpu opp_table.
> >
> > * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> > the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> > max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> > device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> > in between.
> >
> > Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> > dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> > to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> > after kernel-5.7
> > Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> > since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> > [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> > drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> > 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> > device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> > through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> > devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> > + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> > + the online CPUs current frequency.
> >
> > comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> > */
> >
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> > #include <linux/device.h>
> > #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > #include "governor.h"
> >
> > -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
> > + unsigned int min_freq;
> > + unsigned int max_freq;
> > + unsigned int first_cpu;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> > +};
>
> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>
> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>
> /**
> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> *
> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> */
> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> struct device *dev;
> unsigned int first_cpu;
>
> struct opp_table *opp_table;
> unsigned int cur_freq;
> unsigned int min_freq;
> unsigned int max_freq;
> };
>
>
> > +
> > +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> > + unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> > + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> > +
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> > + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> > + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> > +
> > + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> > + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> > + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> > + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> > + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> > +
> > + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> > + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> > + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> > + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> > + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > +
> > + if (dev_freq_table) {
> > + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> > + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> > + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> > +
> > + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
> > + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> > +
> > +out:
> > + return freq;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> > +
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> > + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> > + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> > +
> > + *freq = target_freq;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>
> For example but this code is not tested,
> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
> struct opp_table *opp_table,
> unsigned long freq)
> {
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>
> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
> return 0;
>
> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> return 0;
>
> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>
> if (IS_ERR(opp))
> return 0;
>
> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>
> return freq;
> }
>
> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned long *target_freq)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
> unsigned long freq = 0;
>
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
> continue;
>
> /* Get target freq via required opps */
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
> cpu_data->opp_table,
> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
> if (freq) {
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> continue;
> }
>
> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>
> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>
> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned long *freq)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > int i, count;
> >
> > /*
> > - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > - */
> > - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > -
> > - /*
> > * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> > * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> > */
> > @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > + */
> > + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > +
> > + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > {
> > @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> > + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>
> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
>
> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> if there is no any special reason.
>
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> > + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>
> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>
> > + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
> as following:
> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + get_online_cpus();
> > +
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>
> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> > + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> > + if (!policy) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> > + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> > + goto out;
> > + }
>
> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
> It make code more simple.
>
> > +
> > + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!cpu_state) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> > + if (!cpu_dev) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> > + ret = -ENODEV;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> > + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> > + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> > + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> > + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> > + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> > + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> > +
> > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> > + }
> > +
> > +out:
> > + put_online_cpus();
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* Update devfreq */
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret)
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + int cpu;
> > +
> > + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> > + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > +
> > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state) {
> > + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> > + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> > + kfree(cpu_state);
> > + cpu_state = NULL;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> > + &(*p_data)->nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>
> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>
>
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned int event, void *data)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> > - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > - if (!parent)
> > + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> > return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >
> > switch (event) {
> > @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > if (!p_data->this)
> > p_data->this = devfreq;
> >
> > - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > +
> > case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > default:
> > break;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> > /**
> > + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> > + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> > + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> > + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> > + *
> > + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> > + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> > + */
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> > +
> > +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> > + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > +};
> > +
> > +/**
> > * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> > * and devfreq_add_device
> > * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> > @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> > * using governors except for passive governor.
> > * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> > * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> > + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> > * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> > * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> > + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> > *
> > * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> > * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> > - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> > - * them.
> > + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> > + * will handle them.
> > */
> > struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> > @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> > int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
> >
> > + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> > + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> > +
> > /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> > struct devfreq *this;
> > struct notifier_block nb;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> >
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-03-31 8:03 ` andrew-sh.cheng
(?)
@ 2021-03-31 8:27 ` Chanwoo Choi
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-03-31 8:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>
>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>
>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>
> Hi Chanwoo,
>
> Thank you for the advices.
> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> that my patch set base on
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
[1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>
>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>
>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>
>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>> following:
>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>
>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>> in between.
>>>
>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>> after kernel-5.7
>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>
>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>> */
>>>
>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>
>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>> +};
>>
>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>
>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>
>> /**
>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>> *
>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>> */
>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>> struct device *dev;
>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>
>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>> unsigned int min_freq;
>> unsigned int max_freq;
>> };
>>
>>
>>> +
>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>> +{
>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>> +
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>> +
>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>> +
>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>> +
>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>> + } else {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>> + }
>>> + } else {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>> +
>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + return freq;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>> +
>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>> +
>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>
>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>
>> For example but this code is not tested,
>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>> unsigned long freq)
>> {
>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>
>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>> return 0;
>>
>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>> return 0;
>>
>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>
>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>> return 0;
>>
>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>
>> return freq;
>> }
>>
>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>> {
>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>
>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>> continue;
>>
>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>> if (freq) {
>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>> continue;
>> }
>>
>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>
>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>
>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>
>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>> }
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>>> +
>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> int i, count;
>>>
>>> /*
>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>> - */
>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>> -
>>> - /*
>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>> */
>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>> + */
>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>> +
>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>> {
>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>
>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>
>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>
>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>> if there is no any special reason.
>>
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>
>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>
>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>> +
>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>
>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>> as following:
>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>
>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>
>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>> +
>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>
>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>
>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>> + if (!policy) {
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>
>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>> It make code more simple.
>>
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>> +
>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>
>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>
>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + int cpu;
>>> +
>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> +
>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>> +{
>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>
>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>
>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>
>>
>>> +
>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>> int ret = 0;
>>>
>>> - if (!parent)
>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>
>>> switch (event) {
>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>
>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>> break;
>>> +
>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>> break;
>>> default:
>>> break;
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>
>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>> /**
>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>> + *
>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>> + */
>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>> +
>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +/**
>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>> *
>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>> - * them.
>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>> + * will handle them.
>>> */
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>
>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>> +
>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>> };
>>> #endif
>>>
>>>
>>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-31 8:27 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-03-31 8:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>
>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>
>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>
> Hi Chanwoo,
>
> Thank you for the advices.
> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> that my patch set base on
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
[1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>
>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>
>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>
>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>> following:
>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>
>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>> in between.
>>>
>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>> after kernel-5.7
>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>
>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>> */
>>>
>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>
>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>> +};
>>
>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>
>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>
>> /**
>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>> *
>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>> */
>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>> struct device *dev;
>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>
>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>> unsigned int min_freq;
>> unsigned int max_freq;
>> };
>>
>>
>>> +
>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>> +{
>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>> +
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>> +
>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>> +
>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>> +
>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>> + } else {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>> + }
>>> + } else {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>> +
>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + return freq;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>> +
>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>> +
>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>
>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>
>> For example but this code is not tested,
>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>> unsigned long freq)
>> {
>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>
>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>> return 0;
>>
>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>> return 0;
>>
>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>
>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>> return 0;
>>
>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>
>> return freq;
>> }
>>
>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>> {
>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>
>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>> continue;
>>
>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>> if (freq) {
>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>> continue;
>> }
>>
>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>
>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>
>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>
>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>> }
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>>> +
>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> int i, count;
>>>
>>> /*
>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>> - */
>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>> -
>>> - /*
>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>> */
>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>> + */
>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>> +
>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>> {
>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>
>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>
>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>
>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>> if there is no any special reason.
>>
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>
>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>
>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>> +
>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>
>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>> as following:
>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>
>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>
>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>> +
>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>
>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>
>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>> + if (!policy) {
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>
>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>> It make code more simple.
>>
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>> +
>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>
>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>
>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + int cpu;
>>> +
>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> +
>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>> +{
>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>
>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>
>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>
>>
>>> +
>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>> int ret = 0;
>>>
>>> - if (!parent)
>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>
>>> switch (event) {
>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>
>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>> break;
>>> +
>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>> break;
>>> default:
>>> break;
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>
>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>> /**
>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>> + *
>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>> + */
>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>> +
>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +/**
>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>> *
>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>> - * them.
>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>> + * will handle them.
>>> */
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>
>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>> +
>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>> };
>>> #endif
>>>
>>>
>>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-31 8:27 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-03-31 8:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>
>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>
>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>
> Hi Chanwoo,
>
> Thank you for the advices.
> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> that my patch set base on
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
[1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>
>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>
>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>
>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>> following:
>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>
>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>> in between.
>>>
>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>> after kernel-5.7
>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>
>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>> */
>>>
>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>
>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>> +};
>>
>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>
>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>
>> /**
>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>> *
>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>> */
>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>> struct device *dev;
>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>
>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>> unsigned int min_freq;
>> unsigned int max_freq;
>> };
>>
>>
>>> +
>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>> +{
>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>> +
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>> +
>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>> +
>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>> +
>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>> + } else {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>> + }
>>> + } else {
>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>> +
>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + return freq;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>> +
>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>> +
>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>
>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>
>> For example but this code is not tested,
>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>> unsigned long freq)
>> {
>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>
>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>> return 0;
>>
>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>> return 0;
>>
>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>
>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>> return 0;
>>
>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>
>> return freq;
>> }
>>
>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>> {
>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>
>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>> continue;
>>
>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>> if (freq) {
>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>> continue;
>> }
>>
>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>
>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>
>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>
>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>> }
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>>> +
>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> int i, count;
>>>
>>> /*
>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>> - */
>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>> -
>>> - /*
>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>> */
>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>> + */
>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>> +
>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>> {
>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>
>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>
>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>
>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>> if there is no any special reason.
>>
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>
>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>
>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>> +
>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>
>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>> as following:
>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>
>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>
>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>> +
>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>
>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>
>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>> + if (!policy) {
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>
>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>> It make code more simple.
>>
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>> +
>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>
>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>
>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>
>>> +{
>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>> + int cpu;
>>> +
>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> +
>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>> +{
>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>> + break;
>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>> + break;
>>> + default:
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>
>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>
>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>
>>
>>> +
>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>> int ret = 0;
>>>
>>> - if (!parent)
>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>
>>> switch (event) {
>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>
>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>> break;
>>> +
>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>> break;
>>> default:
>>> break;
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>
>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>> /**
>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>> + *
>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>> + */
>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>> +
>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +/**
>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>> *
>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>> - * them.
>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>> + * will handle them.
>>> */
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>
>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>> +
>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>> };
>>> #endif
>>>
>>>
>>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-03-31 8:27 ` Chanwoo Choi
(?)
@ 2021-03-31 8:35 ` Chanwoo Choi
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-03-31 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>
>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>
>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>
>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>
>> Thank you for the advices.
>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>> that my patch set base on
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
>
> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>
> [1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454
Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
How about that?
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>
>>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>>
>>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>>
>>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>>> following:
>>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>>
>>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>>> in between.
>>>>
>>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>>> after kernel-5.7
>>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>>
>>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>>> */
>>>>
>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>>
>>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>>
>>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>> *
>>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>> */
>>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>> struct device *dev;
>>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>
>>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>>> unsigned int min_freq;
>>> unsigned int max_freq;
>>> };
>>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>>> +
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>> + }
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> + }
>>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>> +
>>>> +out:
>>>> + return freq;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>>> +
>>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>>
>>> For example but this code is not tested,
>>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>>> unsigned long freq)
>>> {
>>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>
>>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>
>>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>
>>> return freq;
>>> }
>>>
>>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>>
>>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>>> continue;
>>>
>>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>>> if (freq) {
>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>> continue;
>>> }
>>>
>>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>>
>>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>>
>>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>
>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>> }
>>>
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>>> {
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> int i, count;
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>> - */
>>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> -
>>>> - /*
>>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>>> */
>>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> +
>>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>> {
>>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>>
>>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>>
>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>
>>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>> if there is no any special reason.
>>>
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>>
>>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>>
>>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>>> +
>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>
>>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>>> as following:
>>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>>
>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>
>>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>>
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>>> +
>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>>
>>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>>
>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>>> + continue;
>>>> +
>>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>>> + if (!policy) {
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>>> It make code more simple.
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> +out:
>>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>>> + if (ret)
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>
>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + if (ret)
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>> +
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>
>>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>>
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + int cpu;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> +
>>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>> +{
>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>>
>>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>>> {
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>>> int ret = 0;
>>>>
>>>> - if (!parent)
>>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>
>>>> switch (event) {
>>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>>
>>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>> break;
>>>> +
>>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>> break;
>>>> default:
>>>> break;
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>
>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>>> /**
>>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>> + */
>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>>> +
>>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +/**
>>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>>> *
>>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>>> - * them.
>>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>>> + * will handle them.
>>>> */
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>>
>>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>>> +
>>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>>> };
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-31 8:35 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-03-31 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>
>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>
>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>
>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>
>> Thank you for the advices.
>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>> that my patch set base on
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
>
> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>
> [1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454
Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
How about that?
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>
>>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>>
>>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>>
>>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>>> following:
>>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>>
>>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>>> in between.
>>>>
>>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>>> after kernel-5.7
>>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>>
>>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>>> */
>>>>
>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>>
>>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>>
>>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>> *
>>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>> */
>>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>> struct device *dev;
>>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>
>>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>>> unsigned int min_freq;
>>> unsigned int max_freq;
>>> };
>>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>>> +
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>> + }
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> + }
>>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>> +
>>>> +out:
>>>> + return freq;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>>> +
>>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>>
>>> For example but this code is not tested,
>>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>>> unsigned long freq)
>>> {
>>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>
>>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>
>>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>
>>> return freq;
>>> }
>>>
>>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>>
>>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>>> continue;
>>>
>>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>>> if (freq) {
>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>> continue;
>>> }
>>>
>>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>>
>>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>>
>>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>
>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>> }
>>>
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>>> {
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> int i, count;
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>> - */
>>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> -
>>>> - /*
>>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>>> */
>>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> +
>>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>> {
>>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>>
>>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>>
>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>
>>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>> if there is no any special reason.
>>>
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>>
>>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>>
>>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>>> +
>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>
>>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>>> as following:
>>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>>
>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>
>>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>>
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>>> +
>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>>
>>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>>
>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>>> + continue;
>>>> +
>>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>>> + if (!policy) {
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>>> It make code more simple.
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> +out:
>>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>>> + if (ret)
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>
>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + if (ret)
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>> +
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>
>>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>>
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + int cpu;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> +
>>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>> +{
>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>>
>>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>>> {
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>>> int ret = 0;
>>>>
>>>> - if (!parent)
>>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>
>>>> switch (event) {
>>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>>
>>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>> break;
>>>> +
>>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>> break;
>>>> default:
>>>> break;
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>
>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>>> /**
>>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>> + */
>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>>> +
>>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +/**
>>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>>> *
>>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>>> - * them.
>>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>>> + * will handle them.
>>>> */
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>>
>>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>>> +
>>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>>> };
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-31 8:35 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-03-31 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>
>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>
>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>
>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>
>> Thank you for the advices.
>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>> that my patch set base on
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
>
> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>
> [1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454
Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
How about that?
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>
>>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>>
>>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>>
>>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>>> following:
>>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>>
>>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>>> in between.
>>>>
>>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>>> after kernel-5.7
>>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>>
>>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>>> */
>>>>
>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>>
>>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>>
>>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>> *
>>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>> */
>>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>> struct device *dev;
>>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>
>>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>>> unsigned int min_freq;
>>> unsigned int max_freq;
>>> };
>>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>>> +
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>> + }
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> + }
>>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>> +
>>>> +out:
>>>> + return freq;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>>> +
>>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>>
>>> For example but this code is not tested,
>>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>>> unsigned long freq)
>>> {
>>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>
>>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>
>>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>
>>> return freq;
>>> }
>>>
>>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>>> {
>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>>
>>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>>> continue;
>>>
>>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>>> if (freq) {
>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>> continue;
>>> }
>>>
>>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>>
>>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>>
>>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>
>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>> }
>>>
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>>> {
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> int i, count;
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>> - */
>>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> -
>>>> - /*
>>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>>> */
>>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> +
>>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>> {
>>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>>
>>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>>
>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>
>>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>> if there is no any special reason.
>>>
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>>
>>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>>
>>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>>> +
>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>
>>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>>> as following:
>>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>>
>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>
>>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>>
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>>> +
>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>>
>>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>>
>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>>> + continue;
>>>> +
>>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>>> + if (!policy) {
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>>> It make code more simple.
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>>> +
>>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> +out:
>>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>>> + if (ret)
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>
>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>> + if (ret)
>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>> +
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>
>>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>>
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>> + int cpu;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> +
>>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>> +{
>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>>
>>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>>> {
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>>> int ret = 0;
>>>>
>>>> - if (!parent)
>>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>
>>>> switch (event) {
>>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>>
>>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>> break;
>>>> +
>>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>> break;
>>>> default:
>>>> break;
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>
>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>>> /**
>>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>> + */
>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>>> +
>>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +/**
>>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>>> *
>>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>>> - * them.
>>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>>> + * will handle them.
>>>> */
>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>>
>>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>>> +
>>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>>> };
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-03-31 8:35 ` Chanwoo Choi
@ 2021-03-31 13:03 ` andrew-sh.cheng
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-03-31 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>
> >>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>
> >>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> >>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>
> >> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>
> >> Thank you for the advices.
> >> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >> that my patch set base on
> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >
> > I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> > So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> > and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >
> > [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>
>
> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>
> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> How about that?
>
Hi Chanwoo~
We will use this on Google Chrome project.
Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
suspend resume
speedometer2 benchmark
It is okay.
Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> >>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >>>>
> >>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> >>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> >>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> >>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
> >>>>
> >>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> >>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> >>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> >>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> >>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> >>>> current CPU frequency.
> >>>>
> >>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> >>>> following:
> >>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> >>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
> >>>>
> >>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> >>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> >>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> >>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> >>>> in between.
> >>>>
> >>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> >>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> >>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> >>>> after kernel-5.7
> >>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> >>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> >>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> >>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> >>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> >>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> >>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> >>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> >>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> >>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> >>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
> >>>>
> >>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> >>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> >>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> >>>> */
> >>>>
> >>>> #include <linux/module.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> >>>> #include <linux/device.h>
> >>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> >>>> #include "governor.h"
> >>>>
> >>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> >>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
> >>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
> >>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
> >>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
> >>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> >>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> >>>> +};
> >>>
> >>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
> >>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
> >>>
> >>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
> >>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
> >>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
> >>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
> >>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> >>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
> >>>
> >>> /**
> >>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
> >>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> >>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> >>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> >>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> >>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> >>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> >>> *
> >>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
> >>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> >>> */
> >>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> >>> struct device *dev;
> >>> unsigned int first_cpu;
> >>>
> >>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
> >>> unsigned int cur_freq;
> >>> unsigned int min_freq;
> >>> unsigned int max_freq;
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> >>>> + unsigned int cpu)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> >>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> >>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> >>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> >>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> >>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> >>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> >>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> >>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> >>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> >>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> >>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> >>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> >>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> >>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> >>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
> >>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> >>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> >>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> >>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> >>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> >>>> + } else {
> >>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> >>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + } else {
> >>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> >>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> >>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> >>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
> >>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +out:
> >>>> + return freq;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> + unsigned long *freq)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> >>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> >>>> + unsigned int cpu;
> >>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> >>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> >>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> >>>> +
> >>>> + *freq = target_freq;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +}
> >>>
> >>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
> >>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
> >>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
> >>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
> >>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
> >>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
> >>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
> >>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
> >>>
> >>> For example but this code is not tested,
> >>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
> >>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
> >>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
> >>> unsigned long freq)
> >>> {
> >>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> >>>
> >>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
> >>> return 0;
> >>>
> >>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
> >>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> >>> return 0;
> >>>
> >>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
> >>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> >>>
> >>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
> >>> return 0;
> >>>
> >>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> >>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> >>>
> >>> return freq;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>> unsigned long *target_freq)
> >>> {
> >>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> >>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> >>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
> >>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
> >>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
> >>> unsigned long freq = 0;
> >>>
> >>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> >>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
> >>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
> >>> continue;
> >>>
> >>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
> >>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
> >>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
> >>> cpu_data->opp_table,
> >>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
> >>> if (freq) {
> >>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> >>> continue;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> >>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
> >>>
> >>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
> >>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
> >>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
> >>>
> >>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
> >>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
> >>>
> >>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> return 0;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> unsigned long *freq)
> >>>> {
> >>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> >>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> int i, count;
> >>>>
> >>>> /*
> >>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> >>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> >>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> >>>> - */
> >>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> >>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> >>>> -
> >>>> - /*
> >>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> >>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> >>>> */
> >>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> return 0;
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> + unsigned long *freq)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> >>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> >>>> + int ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /*
> >>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> >>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> >>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> >>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> >>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + default:
> >>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> >>>> {
> >>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> >>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> >>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> >>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
> >>>
> >>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
> >>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
> >>>
> >>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
> >>>
> >>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> >>> if there is no any special reason.
> >>>
> >>>> + int ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> >>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> >>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
> >>>
> >>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
> >>>
> >>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> >>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> >>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
> >>>
> >>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
> >>> as following:
> >>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
> >>>
> >>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> >>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> >>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> >>>
> >>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
> >>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
> >>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
> >>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
> >>>
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> >>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> >>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> >>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> >>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> >>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> >>>> + unsigned int cpu;
> >>>> + int ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + get_online_cpus();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> >>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> >>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> >>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
> >>>
> >>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
> >>>
> >>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> >>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> >>>> + continue;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> >>>> + if (!policy) {
> >>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> >>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> >>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>
> >>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
> >>> It make code more simple.
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
> >>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> >>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
> >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> >>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> >>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> >>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> >>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> >>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> >>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> >>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> >>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> >>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> +out:
> >>>> + put_online_cpus();
> >>>> + if (ret)
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Update devfreq */
> >>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> >>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
> >>>
> >>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> >>>> + if (ret)
> >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> >>>
> >>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
> >>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
> >>>
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> >>>> + int cpu;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> >>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> >>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> >>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> >>>> + if (cpu_state) {
> >>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> >>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> >>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
> >>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> >>>> + int ret = 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> >>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> >>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> >>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + default:
> >>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + int ret = 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> >>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> >>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
> >>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + default:
> >>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +}
> >>>
> >>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
> >>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
> >>>
> >>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
> >>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
> >>>> {
> >>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> >>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> >>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> >>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> >>>> int ret = 0;
> >>>>
> >>>> - if (!parent)
> >>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> >>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >>>>
> >>>> switch (event) {
> >>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> if (!p_data->this)
> >>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
> >>>>
> >>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> >>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> >>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> >>>> break;
> >>>> +
> >>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> >>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> >>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> >>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> >>>> break;
> >>>> default:
> >>>> break;
> >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> >>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> >>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> >>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> >>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >>>>
> >>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> >>>> /**
> >>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> >>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> >>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> >>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> >>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> >>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> >>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> >>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> >>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> >>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> +/**
> >>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> >>>> * and devfreq_add_device
> >>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> >>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
> >>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> >>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> >>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> >>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> >>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> >>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> >>>> *
> >>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> >>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> >>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> >>>> - * them.
> >>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> >>>> + * will handle them.
> >>>> */
> >>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
> >>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> >>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> >>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> >>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
> >>>>
> >>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> >>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> >>>> +
> >>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> >>>> struct devfreq *this;
> >>>> struct notifier_block nb;
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> >>>> };
> >>>> #endif
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-31 13:03 ` andrew-sh.cheng
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-03-31 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>
> >>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>
> >>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> >>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>
> >> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>
> >> Thank you for the advices.
> >> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >> that my patch set base on
> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >
> > I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> > So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> > and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >
> > [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>
>
> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>
> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> How about that?
>
Hi Chanwoo~
We will use this on Google Chrome project.
Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
suspend resume
speedometer2 benchmark
It is okay.
Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> >>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >>>>
> >>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> >>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> >>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> >>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
> >>>>
> >>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> >>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> >>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> >>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> >>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> >>>> current CPU frequency.
> >>>>
> >>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> >>>> following:
> >>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> >>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
> >>>>
> >>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> >>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> >>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> >>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> >>>> in between.
> >>>>
> >>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> >>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> >>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> >>>> after kernel-5.7
> >>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> >>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> >>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> >>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> >>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> >>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> >>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> >>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> >>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> >>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> >>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
> >>>>
> >>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> >>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> >>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> >>>> */
> >>>>
> >>>> #include <linux/module.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> >>>> #include <linux/device.h>
> >>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> >>>> #include "governor.h"
> >>>>
> >>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> >>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
> >>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
> >>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
> >>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
> >>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> >>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> >>>> +};
> >>>
> >>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
> >>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
> >>>
> >>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
> >>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
> >>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
> >>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
> >>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> >>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
> >>>
> >>> /**
> >>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
> >>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> >>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> >>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> >>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> >>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> >>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> >>> *
> >>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
> >>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> >>> */
> >>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> >>> struct device *dev;
> >>> unsigned int first_cpu;
> >>>
> >>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
> >>> unsigned int cur_freq;
> >>> unsigned int min_freq;
> >>> unsigned int max_freq;
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> >>>> + unsigned int cpu)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> >>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> >>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> >>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> >>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> >>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> >>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> >>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> >>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> >>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> >>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> >>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> >>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> >>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> >>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> >>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
> >>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> >>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> >>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> >>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> >>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> >>>> + } else {
> >>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> >>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + } else {
> >>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> >>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> >>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> >>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
> >>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +out:
> >>>> + return freq;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> + unsigned long *freq)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> >>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> >>>> + unsigned int cpu;
> >>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> >>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> >>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> >>>> +
> >>>> + *freq = target_freq;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +}
> >>>
> >>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
> >>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
> >>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
> >>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
> >>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
> >>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
> >>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
> >>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
> >>>
> >>> For example but this code is not tested,
> >>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
> >>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
> >>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
> >>> unsigned long freq)
> >>> {
> >>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> >>>
> >>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
> >>> return 0;
> >>>
> >>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
> >>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> >>> return 0;
> >>>
> >>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
> >>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> >>>
> >>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
> >>> return 0;
> >>>
> >>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> >>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> >>>
> >>> return freq;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>> unsigned long *target_freq)
> >>> {
> >>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> >>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> >>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
> >>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
> >>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
> >>> unsigned long freq = 0;
> >>>
> >>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> >>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
> >>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
> >>> continue;
> >>>
> >>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
> >>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
> >>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
> >>> cpu_data->opp_table,
> >>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
> >>> if (freq) {
> >>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> >>> continue;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> >>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
> >>>
> >>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
> >>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
> >>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
> >>>
> >>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
> >>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
> >>>
> >>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> return 0;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> unsigned long *freq)
> >>>> {
> >>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> >>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> int i, count;
> >>>>
> >>>> /*
> >>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> >>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> >>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> >>>> - */
> >>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> >>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> >>>> -
> >>>> - /*
> >>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> >>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> >>>> */
> >>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> return 0;
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> + unsigned long *freq)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> >>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> >>>> + int ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /*
> >>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> >>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> >>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> >>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> >>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + default:
> >>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> >>>> {
> >>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> >>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> >>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> >>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
> >>>
> >>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
> >>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
> >>>
> >>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
> >>>
> >>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> >>> if there is no any special reason.
> >>>
> >>>> + int ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> >>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> >>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
> >>>
> >>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
> >>>
> >>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> >>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> >>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
> >>>
> >>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
> >>> as following:
> >>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
> >>>
> >>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> >>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> >>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> >>>
> >>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
> >>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
> >>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
> >>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
> >>>
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> >>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> >>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> >>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> >>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> >>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> >>>> + unsigned int cpu;
> >>>> + int ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + get_online_cpus();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> >>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> >>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> >>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
> >>>
> >>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
> >>>
> >>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> >>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> >>>> + continue;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> >>>> + if (!policy) {
> >>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> >>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> >>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>
> >>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
> >>> It make code more simple.
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
> >>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> >>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
> >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> >>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> >>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> >>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> >>>> + goto out;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> >>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> >>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> >>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> >>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> >>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> >>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> +out:
> >>>> + put_online_cpus();
> >>>> + if (ret)
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Update devfreq */
> >>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> >>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
> >>>
> >>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> >>>> + if (ret)
> >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> >>>
> >>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
> >>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
> >>>
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> >>>> + int cpu;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> >>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> >>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> >>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> >>>> + if (cpu_state) {
> >>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> >>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> >>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
> >>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> >>>> + int ret = 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> >>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> >>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> >>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + default:
> >>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + int ret = 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> >>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> >>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
> >>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> >>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + default:
> >>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +}
> >>>
> >>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
> >>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
> >>>
> >>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
> >>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
> >>>> {
> >>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> >>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> >>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> >>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> >>>> int ret = 0;
> >>>>
> >>>> - if (!parent)
> >>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> >>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >>>>
> >>>> switch (event) {
> >>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> >>>> if (!p_data->this)
> >>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
> >>>>
> >>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> >>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> >>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> >>>> break;
> >>>> +
> >>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> >>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> >>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> >>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> >>>> break;
> >>>> default:
> >>>> break;
> >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> >>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> >>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> >>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> >>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >>>>
> >>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> >>>> /**
> >>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> >>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> >>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> >>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> >>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> >>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> >>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> >>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> >>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> >>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> +/**
> >>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> >>>> * and devfreq_add_device
> >>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> >>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
> >>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> >>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> >>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> >>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> >>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> >>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> >>>> *
> >>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> >>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> >>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> >>>> - * them.
> >>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> >>>> + * will handle them.
> >>>> */
> >>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
> >>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> >>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> >>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> >>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
> >>>>
> >>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> >>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> >>>> +
> >>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> >>>> struct devfreq *this;
> >>>> struct notifier_block nb;
> >>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> >>>> };
> >>>> #endif
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-03-31 13:03 ` andrew-sh.cheng
(?)
@ 2021-04-01 0:16 ` Chanwoo Choi
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-04-01 0:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>
>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>
>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>
>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>
>>
>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>
>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>> How about that?
>>
> Hi Chanwoo~
>
> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>
> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> suspend resume
> speedometer2 benchmark
> It is okay.
>
> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>
> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>>>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>>>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>>>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>>>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>>>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>>>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>>>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>>>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>>>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>>>>> following:
>>>>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>>>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>>>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>>>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>>>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>>>>> in between.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>>>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>>>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>>>>> after kernel-5.7
>>>>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>>>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>>>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>>>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>>>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>>>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>>>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>>>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>>>>> */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>>>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>
>>>>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>>>>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>>>>
>>>>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>>>>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>>>>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>>>>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>>>>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>>>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>>>>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> *
>>>>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>>>>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>>> */
>>>>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>>> struct device *dev;
>>>>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>>>
>>>>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>>>>> unsigned int min_freq;
>>>>> unsigned int max_freq;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>>>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>>>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>>>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>>>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>>>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>>>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>>>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>>>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>>>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>>>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out:
>>>>>> + return freq;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>>>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>>>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>>>>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>>>>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>>>>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>>>>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>>>>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>>>>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>>>>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>>>>
>>>>> For example but this code is not tested,
>>>>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>>>>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>>>>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>>>>> unsigned long freq)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>>>>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>>>>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>>>
>>>>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>>>
>>>>> return freq;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>>>>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>>>>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>>>>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>>>>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>>>>> continue;
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>>>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>>>>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>>>>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>>>>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>>>>> if (freq) {
>>>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>>>> continue;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>>>>
>>>>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>>>>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>>>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>>>>
>>>>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>>>>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>>>
>>>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> int i, count;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>>>> - */
>>>>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - /*
>>>>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>>>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>>>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>>>>
>>>>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>>>>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>>>
>>>>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>>>> if there is no any special reason.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>>>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>>>
>>>>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>>>>> as following:
>>>>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>>>>
>>>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>
>>>>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>>>>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>>>>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>>>>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>>>>
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>>>>> + continue;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>>>>> + if (!policy) {
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>>>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>>>>> It make code more simple.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>>>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>>>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>>>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out:
>>>>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>>>
>>>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>
>>>>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>>>>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>>>>
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + int cpu;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>>>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>>>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>>>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>>>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>>>>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>>>>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>>>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>>>>> int ret = 0;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (!parent)
>>>>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>>>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> switch (event) {
>>>>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>>>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>>>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> default:
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>>>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>>>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +/**
>>>>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>>>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>>>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>>>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>>>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>>>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>>>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>>>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>>>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>>>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>>>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>>>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>>>>> - * them.
>>>>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>>>>> + * will handle them.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>>>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>>>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>>>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>>>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>>>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>>>>> };
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-04-01 0:16 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-04-01 0:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>
>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>
>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>
>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>
>>
>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>
>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>> How about that?
>>
> Hi Chanwoo~
>
> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>
> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> suspend resume
> speedometer2 benchmark
> It is okay.
>
> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>
> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>>>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>>>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>>>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>>>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>>>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>>>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>>>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>>>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>>>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>>>>> following:
>>>>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>>>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>>>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>>>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>>>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>>>>> in between.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>>>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>>>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>>>>> after kernel-5.7
>>>>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>>>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>>>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>>>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>>>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>>>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>>>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>>>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>>>>> */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>>>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>
>>>>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>>>>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>>>>
>>>>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>>>>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>>>>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>>>>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>>>>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>>>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>>>>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> *
>>>>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>>>>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>>> */
>>>>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>>> struct device *dev;
>>>>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>>>
>>>>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>>>>> unsigned int min_freq;
>>>>> unsigned int max_freq;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>>>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>>>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>>>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>>>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>>>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>>>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>>>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>>>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>>>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>>>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out:
>>>>>> + return freq;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>>>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>>>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>>>>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>>>>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>>>>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>>>>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>>>>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>>>>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>>>>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>>>>
>>>>> For example but this code is not tested,
>>>>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>>>>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>>>>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>>>>> unsigned long freq)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>>>>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>>>>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>>>
>>>>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>>>
>>>>> return freq;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>>>>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>>>>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>>>>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>>>>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>>>>> continue;
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>>>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>>>>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>>>>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>>>>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>>>>> if (freq) {
>>>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>>>> continue;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>>>>
>>>>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>>>>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>>>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>>>>
>>>>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>>>>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>>>
>>>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> int i, count;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>>>> - */
>>>>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - /*
>>>>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>>>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>>>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>>>>
>>>>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>>>>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>>>
>>>>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>>>> if there is no any special reason.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>>>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>>>
>>>>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>>>>> as following:
>>>>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>>>>
>>>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>
>>>>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>>>>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>>>>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>>>>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>>>>
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>>>>> + continue;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>>>>> + if (!policy) {
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>>>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>>>>> It make code more simple.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>>>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>>>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>>>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out:
>>>>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>>>
>>>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>
>>>>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>>>>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>>>>
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + int cpu;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>>>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>>>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>>>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>>>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>>>>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>>>>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>>>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>>>>> int ret = 0;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (!parent)
>>>>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>>>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> switch (event) {
>>>>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>>>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>>>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> default:
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>>>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>>>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +/**
>>>>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>>>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>>>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>>>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>>>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>>>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>>>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>>>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>>>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>>>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>>>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>>>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>>>>> - * them.
>>>>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>>>>> + * will handle them.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>>>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>>>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>>>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>>>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>>>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>>>>> };
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-04-01 0:16 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-04-01 0:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>
>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>
>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>
>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>
>>
>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>
>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>> How about that?
>>
> Hi Chanwoo~
>
> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>
> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> suspend resume
> speedometer2 benchmark
> It is okay.
>
> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>
> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
>>>>>> From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
>>>>>> CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
>>>>>> cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
>>>>>> power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
>>>>>> passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
>>>>>> of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
>>>>>> (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
>>>>>> to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
>>>>>> current CPU frequency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
>>>>>> following:
>>>>>> * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
>>>>>> the parent cpu opp_table.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
>>>>>> the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
>>>>>> max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
>>>>>> device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
>>>>>> in between.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrew-sh.Cheng change
>>>>>> dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
>>>>>> to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
>>>>>> after kernel-5.7
>>>>>> Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
>>>>>> since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>> [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>>> include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
>>>>>> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
>>>>>> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
>>>>>> device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
>>>>>> through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
>>>>>> devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
>>>>>> + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
>>>>>> + the online CPUs current frequency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
>>>>>> @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
>>>>>> */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/devfreq.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>>>>>> #include "governor.h"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int min_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int max_freq;
>>>>>> + unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>
>>>>> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
>>>>> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>>>>>
>>>>> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
>>>>> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
>>>>> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
>>>>> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
>>>>> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>>>> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
>>>>> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>>> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>>> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>>> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>>> *
>>>>> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
>>>>> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>>> */
>>>>> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
>>>>> struct device *dev;
>>>>> unsigned int first_cpu;
>>>>>
>>>>> struct opp_table *opp_table;
>>>>> unsigned int cur_freq;
>>>>> unsigned int min_freq;
>>>>> unsigned int max_freq;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
>>>>>> + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
>>>>>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>>>> + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
>>>>>> + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
>>>>>> + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
>>>>>> + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>>>>>> + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>>>> + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (dev_freq_table) {
>>>>>> + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
>>>>>> + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
>>>>>> + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
>>>>>> + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
>>>>>> + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
>>>>>> + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out:
>>>>>> + return freq;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>>>> + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>>>>>> + target_freq = max(target_freq,
>>>>>> + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + *freq = target_freq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
>>>>> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
>>>>> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
>>>>> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
>>>>> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
>>>>> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
>>>>> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
>>>>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgA6mp3Yqo$
>>>>>
>>>>> For example but this code is not tested,
>>>>> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
>>>>> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
>>>>> struct opp_table *opp_table,
>>>>> unsigned long freq)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
>>>>> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
>>>>> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>>>>>
>>>>> if (IS_ERR(opp))
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
>>>>> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>>>>>
>>>>> return freq;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>> unsigned long *target_freq)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
>>>>> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
>>>>> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
>>>>> unsigned long freq = 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
>>>>> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
>>>>> continue;
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Get target freq via required opps */
>>>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
>>>>> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
>>>>> cpu_data->opp_table,
>>>>> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
>>>>> if (freq) {
>>>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>>>> continue;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
>>>>> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>>>>>
>>>>> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
>>>>> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
>>>>> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>>>>>
>>>>> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
>>>>> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>>>>>
>>>>> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>>>> @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> int i, count;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>>>> - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>>>> - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>>>> - */
>>>>>> - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>>>> - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - /*
>>>>>> * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
>>>>>> * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> + unsigned long *freq)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
>>>>>> + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
>>>>>> + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
>>>>>> + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
>>>>>> + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
>>>>>> + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>>>>>
>>>>> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
>>>>> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + unsigned int curr_freq;
>>>>>
>>>>> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
>>>>> if there is no any special reason.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
>>>>>> + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>>>
>>>>> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
>>>>> as following:
>>>>> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>>>>>
>>>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
>>>>>> + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>
>>>>> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
>>>>> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
>>>>> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
>>>>> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>>>>>
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
>>>>>> + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
>>>>>> + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>>>>> + struct device *cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + unsigned int cpu;
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + get_online_cpus();
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
>>>>>> + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>>> + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
>>>>>> + continue;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>>>>> + if (!policy) {
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>>>>>> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
>>>>> It make code more simple.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_state) {
>>>>>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>>>>>> + if (!cpu_dev) {
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
>>>>>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
>>>>>> + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
>>>>>> + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
>>>>>> + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out:
>>>>>> + put_online_cpus();
>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Update devfreq */
>>>>>> + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>>>>>
>>>>>> + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>
>>>>> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
>>>>> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>>>>>
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
>>>>>> + int cpu;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
>>>>>> + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>>> + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state) {
>>>>>> + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
>>>>>> + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
>>>>>> + kfree(cpu_state);
>>>>>> + cpu_state = NULL;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
>>>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
>>>>>> + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
>>>>>> + &(*p_data)->nb,
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
>>>>>> + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
>>>>> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
>>>>> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> unsigned int event, void *data)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
>>>>>> = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
>>>>>> struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
>>>>>> - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
>>>>>> int ret = 0;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (!parent)
>>>>>> + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
>>>>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> switch (event) {
>>>>>> @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
>>>>>> if (!p_data->this)
>>>>>> p_data->this = devfreq;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
>>>>>> - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
>>>>>> + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
>>>>>> - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
>>>>>> - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
>>>>>> + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> default:
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
>>>>>> @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
>>>>>> + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
>>>>>> + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
>>>>>> + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
>>>>>> + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
>>>>>> + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
>>>>>> + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>>>> + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +/**
>>>>>> * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
>>>>>> * and devfreq_add_device
>>>>>> * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
>>>>>> @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
>>>>>> * using governors except for passive governor.
>>>>>> * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
>>>>>> * the next frequency, should use this callback.
>>>>>> + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
>>>>>> * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
>>>>>> * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
>>>>>> + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
>>>>>> * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
>>>>>> - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
>>>>>> - * them.
>>>>>> + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
>>>>>> + * will handle them.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>>>> /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
>>>>>> @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
>>>>>> /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
>>>>>> int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + /* Should set the type of parent device */
>>>>>> + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
>>>>>> struct devfreq *this;
>>>>>> struct notifier_block nb;
>>>>>> + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
>>>>>> };
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-04-01 0:16 ` Chanwoo Choi
(?)
@ 2021-04-08 2:47 ` Chanwoo Choi
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-04-08 2:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>
>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>
>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>
>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>> How about that?
>>>
>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>
>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>
>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>> suspend resume
>> speedometer2 benchmark
>> It is okay.
>>
>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>
>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>
> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
version.
[snip]
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-04-08 2:47 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-04-08 2:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>
>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>
>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>
>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>> How about that?
>>>
>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>
>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>
>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>> suspend resume
>> speedometer2 benchmark
>> It is okay.
>>
>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>
>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>
> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
version.
[snip]
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-04-08 2:47 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-04-08 2:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>
>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>
>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>
>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>> How about that?
>>>
>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>
>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>
>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>> suspend resume
>> speedometer2 benchmark
>> It is okay.
>>
>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>
>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>
> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
version.
[snip]
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-04-08 2:47 ` Chanwoo Choi
@ 2021-04-22 13:34 ` andrew-sh.cheng
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-04-22 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> > On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>
> >>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>
> >>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>> How about that?
> >>>
> >> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>
> >> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>
> >> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >> suspend resume
> >> speedometer2 benchmark
> >> It is okay.
> >>
> >> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>
> >> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >
> > Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>
> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> version.
>
>
Hi Chanwoo,
Sorry to bother you.
Do you work on this patch now?
Is there any thing that we can do?
> [snip]
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-04-22 13:34 ` andrew-sh.cheng
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-04-22 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> > On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>
> >>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>
> >>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>> How about that?
> >>>
> >> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>
> >> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>
> >> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >> suspend resume
> >> speedometer2 benchmark
> >> It is okay.
> >>
> >> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>
> >> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >
> > Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>
> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> version.
>
>
Hi Chanwoo,
Sorry to bother you.
Do you work on this patch now?
Is there any thing that we can do?
> [snip]
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-04-08 2:47 ` Chanwoo Choi
@ 2021-05-26 2:22 ` andrew-sh.cheng
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-05-26 2:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> > On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>
> >>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>
> >>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>> How about that?
> >>>
> >> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>
> >> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>
> >> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >> suspend resume
> >> speedometer2 benchmark
> >> It is okay.
> >>
> >> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>
> >> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >
> > Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>
> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> version.
>
Hi Chanwoo Choi~
It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
May I know your plan on this patch?
Thank you.
>
> [snip]
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-05-26 2:22 ` andrew-sh.cheng
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-05-26 2:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> > On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>
> >>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>
> >>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>> How about that?
> >>>
> >> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>
> >> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>
> >> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >> suspend resume
> >> speedometer2 benchmark
> >> It is okay.
> >>
> >> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>
> >> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >
> > Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>
> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> version.
>
Hi Chanwoo Choi~
It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
May I know your plan on this patch?
Thank you.
>
> [snip]
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-05-26 2:22 ` andrew-sh.cheng
(?)
@ 2021-05-26 3:08 ` Chanwoo Choi
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-26 3:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>
>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>> How about that?
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>>>
>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>>>
>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>>>> suspend resume
>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
>>>> It is okay.
>>>>
>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>
>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>>
>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
>> version.
>>
> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
>
> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
> May I know your plan on this patch?
> Thank you.
Sorry for late work. I have a question.
When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
-EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
[1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c#L896
/* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
return -EBUSY;
For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
[2] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c#L386
/* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
{
struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
int i, ret;
/*
* We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
* as we don't know much about other cases.
*/
if (!new_table->is_genpd)
return;
Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-05-26 3:08 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-26 3:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>
>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>> How about that?
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>>>
>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>>>
>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>>>> suspend resume
>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
>>>> It is okay.
>>>>
>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>
>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>>
>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
>> version.
>>
> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
>
> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
> May I know your plan on this patch?
> Thank you.
Sorry for late work. I have a question.
When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
-EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
[1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c#L896
/* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
return -EBUSY;
For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
[2] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c#L386
/* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
{
struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
int i, ret;
/*
* We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
* as we don't know much about other cases.
*/
if (!new_table->is_genpd)
return;
Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-05-26 3:08 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-26 3:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>
>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>> How about that?
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>>>
>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>>>
>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>>>> suspend resume
>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
>>>> It is okay.
>>>>
>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>
>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>>
>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
>> version.
>>
> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
>
> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
> May I know your plan on this patch?
> Thank you.
Sorry for late work. I have a question.
When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
-EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
[1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c#L896
/* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
return -EBUSY;
For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
[2] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c#L386
/* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
{
struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
int i, ret;
/*
* We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
* as we don't know much about other cases.
*/
if (!new_table->is_genpd)
return;
Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-05-26 3:08 ` Chanwoo Choi
@ 2021-05-31 3:22 ` andrew-sh.cheng
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-05-31 3:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi, Hsin-Yi Wang
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 12:08 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> Hi,
> On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> > On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>
> >>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>> How about that?
> >>>>>
> >>>> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>>>
> >>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>>>
> >>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >>>> suspend resume
> >>>> speedometer2 benchmark
> >>>> It is okay.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>
> >>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
> >>
> >> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> >> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> >> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> >> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> >> version.
> >>
> > Hi Chanwoo Choi~
> >
> > It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
> > May I know your plan on this patch?
> > Thank you.
>
> Sorry for late work. I have a question.
> When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
> on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
>
> When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
> -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
>
> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c*L896__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_kxspMJI$
>
> /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
> if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
> return -EBUSY;
>
>
> For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
> will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
> driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
>
> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c*L386__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_QFUVY9E$
>
> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> {
> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> int i, ret;
>
> /*
> * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> * as we don't know much about other cases.
> */
> if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> return;
>
> Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
>
Hi Chanwoo~
Sorry for late reply.
Yes, we meet similar issue.
Google member Hsin-Yi had helped deal with this issue on Chrome project.
Patch segment:
@ /drivers/opp/of.c
/* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
{
struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
int i, ret;
+ /*
+ * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
+ * as we don't know much about other cases.
+ */
+ if (!new_table->is_genpd)
+ return;
Hsin-Yi replied this issue in the discussion list in the original lazy
link thread:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23932203
Loop Hsin-YI here.
You can discuss with her if needing more detail.
Thank you both.
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-05-31 3:22 ` andrew-sh.cheng
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: andrew-sh.cheng @ 2021-05-31 3:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi, Hsin-Yi Wang
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 12:08 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> Hi,
> On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> > On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>
> >>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>> How about that?
> >>>>>
> >>>> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>>>
> >>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>>>
> >>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >>>> suspend resume
> >>>> speedometer2 benchmark
> >>>> It is okay.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>
> >>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
> >>
> >> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> >> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> >> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> >> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> >> version.
> >>
> > Hi Chanwoo Choi~
> >
> > It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
> > May I know your plan on this patch?
> > Thank you.
>
> Sorry for late work. I have a question.
> When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
> on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
>
> When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
> -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
>
> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c*L896__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_kxspMJI$
>
> /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
> if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
> return -EBUSY;
>
>
> For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
> will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
> driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
>
> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c*L386__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_QFUVY9E$
>
> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> {
> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> int i, ret;
>
> /*
> * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> * as we don't know much about other cases.
> */
> if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> return;
>
> Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
>
Hi Chanwoo~
Sorry for late reply.
Yes, we meet similar issue.
Google member Hsin-Yi had helped deal with this issue on Chrome project.
Patch segment:
@ /drivers/opp/of.c
/* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
{
struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
int i, ret;
+ /*
+ * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
+ * as we don't know much about other cases.
+ */
+ if (!new_table->is_genpd)
+ return;
Hsin-Yi replied this issue in the discussion list in the original lazy
link thread:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23932203
Loop Hsin-YI here.
You can discuss with her if needing more detail.
Thank you both.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-05-31 3:22 ` andrew-sh.cheng
(?)
@ 2021-05-31 7:56 ` Chanwoo Choi
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-31 7:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng, Hsin-Yi Wang
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 5/31/21 12:22 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 12:08 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>>>> How about that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>>>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>>>>>> suspend resume
>>>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
>>>>>> It is okay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
>>>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
>>>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
>>>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
>>>> version.
>>>>
>>> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
>>>
>>> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
>>> May I know your plan on this patch?
>>> Thank you.
>>
>> Sorry for late work. I have a question.
>> When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
>> on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
>>
>> When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
>> -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
>>
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c*L896__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_kxspMJI$
>>
>> /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
>> if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
>> return -EBUSY;
>>
>>
>> For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
>> will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
>> driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
>>
>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c*L386__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_QFUVY9E$
>>
>> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
>> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
>> {
>> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
>> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
>> int i, ret;
>>
>> /*
>> * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
>> * as we don't know much about other cases.
>> */
>> if (!new_table->is_genpd)
>> return;
>>
>> Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
>>
>
> Hi Chanwoo~
> Sorry for late reply.
> Yes, we meet similar issue.
> Google member Hsin-Yi had helped deal with this issue on Chrome project.
>
> Patch segment:
> @ /drivers/opp/of.c
>
> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> {
> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> int i, ret;
>
> + /*
> + * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> + * as we don't know much about other cases.
> + */
> + if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> + return;
>
>
> Hsin-Yi replied this issue in the discussion list in the original lazy
> link thread:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23932203
>
> Loop Hsin-YI here.
> You can discuss with her if needing more detail.
>
> Thank you both.
>
Thanks. First of all, we need to resolve and discuss this issue.
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-05-31 7:56 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-31 7:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng, Hsin-Yi Wang
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 5/31/21 12:22 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 12:08 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>>>> How about that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>>>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>>>>>> suspend resume
>>>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
>>>>>> It is okay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
>>>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
>>>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
>>>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
>>>> version.
>>>>
>>> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
>>>
>>> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
>>> May I know your plan on this patch?
>>> Thank you.
>>
>> Sorry for late work. I have a question.
>> When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
>> on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
>>
>> When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
>> -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
>>
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c*L896__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_kxspMJI$
>>
>> /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
>> if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
>> return -EBUSY;
>>
>>
>> For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
>> will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
>> driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
>>
>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c*L386__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_QFUVY9E$
>>
>> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
>> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
>> {
>> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
>> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
>> int i, ret;
>>
>> /*
>> * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
>> * as we don't know much about other cases.
>> */
>> if (!new_table->is_genpd)
>> return;
>>
>> Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
>>
>
> Hi Chanwoo~
> Sorry for late reply.
> Yes, we meet similar issue.
> Google member Hsin-Yi had helped deal with this issue on Chrome project.
>
> Patch segment:
> @ /drivers/opp/of.c
>
> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> {
> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> int i, ret;
>
> + /*
> + * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> + * as we don't know much about other cases.
> + */
> + if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> + return;
>
>
> Hsin-Yi replied this issue in the discussion list in the original lazy
> link thread:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23932203
>
> Loop Hsin-YI here.
> You can discuss with her if needing more detail.
>
> Thank you both.
>
Thanks. First of all, we need to resolve and discuss this issue.
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-05-31 7:56 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-31 7:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andrew-sh.cheng, Hsin-Yi Wang
Cc: MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring, Mark Rutland,
Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
Hi,
On 5/31/21 12:22 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 12:08 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
>>>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
>>>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
>>>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
>>>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
>>>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
>>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
>>>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
>>>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
>>>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
>>>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
>>>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>>>> How about that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
>>>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
>>>>>> suspend resume
>>>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
>>>>>> It is okay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
>>>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
>>>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
>>>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
>>>> version.
>>>>
>>> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
>>>
>>> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
>>> May I know your plan on this patch?
>>> Thank you.
>>
>> Sorry for late work. I have a question.
>> When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
>> on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
>>
>> When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
>> -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
>>
>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c*L896__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_kxspMJI$
>>
>> /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
>> if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
>> return -EBUSY;
>>
>>
>> For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
>> will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
>> driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
>>
>> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c*L386__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_QFUVY9E$
>>
>> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
>> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
>> {
>> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
>> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
>> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
>> int i, ret;
>>
>> /*
>> * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
>> * as we don't know much about other cases.
>> */
>> if (!new_table->is_genpd)
>> return;
>>
>> Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
>>
>
> Hi Chanwoo~
> Sorry for late reply.
> Yes, we meet similar issue.
> Google member Hsin-Yi had helped deal with this issue on Chrome project.
>
> Patch segment:
> @ /drivers/opp/of.c
>
> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> {
> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> int i, ret;
>
> + /*
> + * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> + * as we don't know much about other cases.
> + */
> + if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> + return;
>
>
> Hsin-Yi replied this issue in the discussion list in the original lazy
> link thread:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23932203
>
> Loop Hsin-YI here.
> You can discuss with her if needing more detail.
>
> Thank you both.
>
Thanks. First of all, we need to resolve and discuss this issue.
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <CACb=7PUkpMkDOJ6dDHXhJ5ep4e9u8ZVYM8M2iC-iwHXn13t3DQ@mail.gmail.com>]
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
[not found] ` <CACb=7PUkpMkDOJ6dDHXhJ5ep4e9u8ZVYM8M2iC-iwHXn13t3DQ@mail.gmail.com>
2021-05-31 8:13 ` Chanwoo Choi
@ 2021-05-31 8:13 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-31 8:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hsin-Yi Wang
Cc: andrew-sh.cheng, MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring,
Mark Rutland, Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 5/31/21 4:42 PM, Hsin-Yi Wang wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 3:37 PM Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com <mailto:cw00.choi@samsung.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 5/31/21 12:22 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 12:08 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org <mailto:skannan@codeaurora.org>>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>>>> How about that?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >>>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >>>>>> suspend resume
> >>>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
> >>>>>> It is okay.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> >>>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> >>>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> >>>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> >>>> version.
> >>>>
> >>> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
> >>>
> >>> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
> >>> May I know your plan on this patch?
> >>> Thank you.
> >>
> >> Sorry for late work. I have a question.
> >> When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
> >> on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
> >>
> >> When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
> >> -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
> >>
> >> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c*L896__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_kxspMJI$
> >>
> >> /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
> >> if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
> >> return -EBUSY;
> >>
> >>
> >> For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
> >> will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
> >> driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
> >>
> >> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c*L386__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_QFUVY9E$
> >>
> >> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> >> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> >> {
> >> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> >> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> >> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> >> int i, ret;
> >>
> >> /*
> >> * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> >> * as we don't know much about other cases.
> >> */
> >> if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> >> return;
> >>
> >> Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
> >>
> >
> > Hi Chanwoo~
> > Sorry for late reply.
> > Yes, we meet similar issue.
> > Google member Hsin-Yi had helped deal with this issue on Chrome project.
> >
> > Patch segment:
> > @ /drivers/opp/of.c
> >
> > /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> > static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> > {
> > struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> > struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> > struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> > int i, ret;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> > + * as we don't know much about other cases.
> > + */
> > + if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> > + return;
> >
> >
> > Hsin-Yi replied this issue in the discussion list in the original lazy
> > link thread:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23932203
> >
> > Loop Hsin-YI here.
> > You can discuss with her if needing more detail.
> >
> > Thank you both.
> >
>
> Thanks. First of all, we need to resolve and discuss this issue.
>
>
> Hi Chanwoo,
>
> We think removing the genpd check is sufficient for our use case since we only use the lazy link for opp table translation.
Hi Hsin-Yi,
IMHO, I think 'is_genpd' checking should be removed for devices except for genpd
like as following:
diff --git a/drivers/opp/of.c b/drivers/opp/of.c
index c582a9ca397b..b54d3a985515 100644
--- a/drivers/opp/of.c
+++ b/drivers/opp/of.c
@@ -201,17 +201,6 @@ static void _opp_table_alloc_required_tables(struct opp_table *opp_table,
lazy = true;
continue;
}
-
- /*
- * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
- * as we don't know how much about other cases. Error out if the
- * required OPP doesn't belong to a genpd.
- */
- if (!required_opp_tables[i]->is_genpd) {
- dev_err(dev, "required-opp doesn't belong to genpd: %pOF\n",
- required_np);
- goto free_required_tables;
- }
}
/* Let's do the linking later on */
@@ -379,13 +368,6 @@ static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
int i, ret;
- /*
- * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
- * as we don't know much about other cases.
- */
- if (!new_table->is_genpd)
- return;
-
mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock);
list_for_each_entry_safe(opp_table, temp, &lazy_opp_tables, lazy) {
@@ -874,7 +856,7 @@ static struct dev_pm_opp *_opp_add_static_v2(struct opp_table *opp_table,
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
ret = _read_opp_key(new_opp, opp_table, np, &rate_not_available);
- if (ret < 0 && !opp_table->is_genpd) {
+ if (ret < 0) {
dev_err(dev, "%s: opp key field not found\n", __func__);
goto free_opp;
}
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-05-31 8:13 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-31 8:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hsin-Yi Wang
Cc: andrew-sh.cheng, MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring,
Mark Rutland, Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 5/31/21 4:42 PM, Hsin-Yi Wang wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 3:37 PM Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com <mailto:cw00.choi@samsung.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 5/31/21 12:22 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 12:08 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org <mailto:skannan@codeaurora.org>>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>>>> How about that?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >>>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >>>>>> suspend resume
> >>>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
> >>>>>> It is okay.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> >>>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> >>>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> >>>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> >>>> version.
> >>>>
> >>> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
> >>>
> >>> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
> >>> May I know your plan on this patch?
> >>> Thank you.
> >>
> >> Sorry for late work. I have a question.
> >> When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
> >> on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
> >>
> >> When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
> >> -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
> >>
> >> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c*L896__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_kxspMJI$
> >>
> >> /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
> >> if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
> >> return -EBUSY;
> >>
> >>
> >> For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
> >> will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
> >> driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
> >>
> >> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c*L386__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_QFUVY9E$
> >>
> >> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> >> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> >> {
> >> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> >> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> >> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> >> int i, ret;
> >>
> >> /*
> >> * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> >> * as we don't know much about other cases.
> >> */
> >> if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> >> return;
> >>
> >> Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
> >>
> >
> > Hi Chanwoo~
> > Sorry for late reply.
> > Yes, we meet similar issue.
> > Google member Hsin-Yi had helped deal with this issue on Chrome project.
> >
> > Patch segment:
> > @ /drivers/opp/of.c
> >
> > /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> > static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> > {
> > struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> > struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> > struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> > int i, ret;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> > + * as we don't know much about other cases.
> > + */
> > + if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> > + return;
> >
> >
> > Hsin-Yi replied this issue in the discussion list in the original lazy
> > link thread:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23932203
> >
> > Loop Hsin-YI here.
> > You can discuss with her if needing more detail.
> >
> > Thank you both.
> >
>
> Thanks. First of all, we need to resolve and discuss this issue.
>
>
> Hi Chanwoo,
>
> We think removing the genpd check is sufficient for our use case since we only use the lazy link for opp table translation.
Hi Hsin-Yi,
IMHO, I think 'is_genpd' checking should be removed for devices except for genpd
like as following:
diff --git a/drivers/opp/of.c b/drivers/opp/of.c
index c582a9ca397b..b54d3a985515 100644
--- a/drivers/opp/of.c
+++ b/drivers/opp/of.c
@@ -201,17 +201,6 @@ static void _opp_table_alloc_required_tables(struct opp_table *opp_table,
lazy = true;
continue;
}
-
- /*
- * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
- * as we don't know how much about other cases. Error out if the
- * required OPP doesn't belong to a genpd.
- */
- if (!required_opp_tables[i]->is_genpd) {
- dev_err(dev, "required-opp doesn't belong to genpd: %pOF\n",
- required_np);
- goto free_required_tables;
- }
}
/* Let's do the linking later on */
@@ -379,13 +368,6 @@ static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
int i, ret;
- /*
- * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
- * as we don't know much about other cases.
- */
- if (!new_table->is_genpd)
- return;
-
mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock);
list_for_each_entry_safe(opp_table, temp, &lazy_opp_tables, lazy) {
@@ -874,7 +856,7 @@ static struct dev_pm_opp *_opp_add_static_v2(struct opp_table *opp_table,
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
ret = _read_opp_key(new_opp, opp_table, np, &rate_not_available);
- if (ret < 0 && !opp_table->is_genpd) {
+ if (ret < 0) {
dev_err(dev, "%s: opp key field not found\n", __func__);
goto free_opp;
}
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-05-31 8:13 ` Chanwoo Choi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Chanwoo Choi @ 2021-05-31 8:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hsin-Yi Wang
Cc: andrew-sh.cheng, MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring,
Mark Rutland, Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek,
linux-kernel, srv_heupstream, Sibi Sankar
On 5/31/21 4:42 PM, Hsin-Yi Wang wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 3:37 PM Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com <mailto:cw00.choi@samsung.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 5/31/21 12:22 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 12:08 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> >>>>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> >>>>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org <mailto:skannan@codeaurora.org>>' is wrong email address.
> >>>>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for the advices.
> >>>>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note
> >>>>>>>>> that my patch set base on
> >>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch.
> >>>>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1]
> >>>>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1]
> >>>>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch.
> >>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series.
> >>>>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you,
> >>>>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>>>> How about that?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Chanwoo~
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project.
> >>>>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq.
> >>>>>> suspend resume
> >>>>>> speedometer2 benchmark
> >>>>>> It is okay.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches
> >>>> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem
> >>>> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them.
> >>>> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux
> >>>> version.
> >>>>
> >>> Hi Chanwoo Choi~
> >>>
> >>> It is said that you are busy on another task recently.
> >>> May I know your plan on this patch?
> >>> Thank you.
> >>
> >> Sorry for late work. I have a question.
> >> When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property
> >> on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about
> >>
> >> When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns
> >> -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1].
> >>
> >> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c*L896__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_kxspMJI$
> >>
> >> /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */
> >> if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table))
> >> return -EBUSY;
> >>
> >>
> >> For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function
> >> will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false,
> >> driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue.
> >>
> >> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c*L386__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!3eNxwDZRy-Ev5BHGxT-BxCz4qrNy0NZohQuBGW36krkwOkl_WX8yBmxlqSk9hxp_QFUVY9E$
> >>
> >> /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> >> static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> >> {
> >> struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> >> struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> >> struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> >> int i, ret;
> >>
> >> /*
> >> * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> >> * as we don't know much about other cases.
> >> */
> >> if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> >> return;
> >>
> >> Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case?
> >>
> >
> > Hi Chanwoo~
> > Sorry for late reply.
> > Yes, we meet similar issue.
> > Google member Hsin-Yi had helped deal with this issue on Chrome project.
> >
> > Patch segment:
> > @ /drivers/opp/of.c
> >
> > /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */
> > static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
> > {
> > struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables;
> > struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
> > struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> > int i, ret;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
> > + * as we don't know much about other cases.
> > + */
> > + if (!new_table->is_genpd)
> > + return;
> >
> >
> > Hsin-Yi replied this issue in the discussion list in the original lazy
> > link thread:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23932203
> >
> > Loop Hsin-YI here.
> > You can discuss with her if needing more detail.
> >
> > Thank you both.
> >
>
> Thanks. First of all, we need to resolve and discuss this issue.
>
>
> Hi Chanwoo,
>
> We think removing the genpd check is sufficient for our use case since we only use the lazy link for opp table translation.
Hi Hsin-Yi,
IMHO, I think 'is_genpd' checking should be removed for devices except for genpd
like as following:
diff --git a/drivers/opp/of.c b/drivers/opp/of.c
index c582a9ca397b..b54d3a985515 100644
--- a/drivers/opp/of.c
+++ b/drivers/opp/of.c
@@ -201,17 +201,6 @@ static void _opp_table_alloc_required_tables(struct opp_table *opp_table,
lazy = true;
continue;
}
-
- /*
- * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
- * as we don't know how much about other cases. Error out if the
- * required OPP doesn't belong to a genpd.
- */
- if (!required_opp_tables[i]->is_genpd) {
- dev_err(dev, "required-opp doesn't belong to genpd: %pOF\n",
- required_np);
- goto free_required_tables;
- }
}
/* Let's do the linking later on */
@@ -379,13 +368,6 @@ static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table)
struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
int i, ret;
- /*
- * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
- * as we don't know much about other cases.
- */
- if (!new_table->is_genpd)
- return;
-
mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock);
list_for_each_entry_safe(opp_table, temp, &lazy_opp_tables, lazy) {
@@ -874,7 +856,7 @@ static struct dev_pm_opp *_opp_add_static_v2(struct opp_table *opp_table,
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
ret = _read_opp_key(new_opp, opp_table, np, &rate_not_available);
- if (ret < 0 && !opp_table->is_genpd) {
+ if (ret < 0) {
dev_err(dev, "%s: opp key field not found\n", __func__);
goto free_opp;
}
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
2021-03-25 8:14 ` Chanwoo Choi
(?)
@ 2021-03-31 10:46 ` Hsin-Yi Wang
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Hsin-Yi Wang @ 2021-03-31 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: Andrew-sh.Cheng, MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring,
Mark Rutland, Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
Linux PM, Devicetree List,
moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support, lkml, srv_heupstream,
Sibi Sankar
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 3:58 PM Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>
> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
>
> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> Please update the email or drop this email.
>
>
> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> > From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> > CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> > cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> > power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
> >
> > To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> > passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> > of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> > (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> > to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> > current CPU frequency.
> >
> > To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> > following:
> > * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> > the parent cpu opp_table.
> >
> > * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> > the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> > max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> > device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> > in between.
> >
> > Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> > dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> > to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> > after kernel-5.7
> > Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> > since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> > [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> > drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> > 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> > device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> > through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> > devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> > + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> > + the online CPUs current frequency.
> >
> > comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> > */
> >
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> > #include <linux/device.h>
> > #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > #include "governor.h"
> >
> > -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
> > + unsigned int min_freq;
> > + unsigned int max_freq;
> > + unsigned int first_cpu;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> > +};
>
> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>
> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>
> /**
> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> *
> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> */
> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> struct device *dev;
> unsigned int first_cpu;
>
> struct opp_table *opp_table;
> unsigned int cur_freq;
> unsigned int min_freq;
> unsigned int max_freq;
> };
>
>
> > +
> > +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> > + unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> > + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> > +
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> > + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> > + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> > +
> > + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> > + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> > + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> > + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> > + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> > +
> > + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> > + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> > + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> > + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> > + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > +
> > + if (dev_freq_table) {
> > + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> > + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> > + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> > +
> > + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
() is missing for denominator?
cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) /
(cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq);
> > + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> > +
> > +out:
> > + return freq;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> > +
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> > + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> > + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> > +
> > + *freq = target_freq;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
> [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf
>
> For example but this code is not tested,
> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
> struct opp_table *opp_table,
> unsigned long freq)
> {
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>
> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
> return 0;
>
> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> return 0;
>
> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>
> if (IS_ERR(opp))
> return 0;
>
> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>
> return freq;
> }
>
> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned long *target_freq)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
> unsigned long freq = 0;
>
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
> continue;
>
> /* Get target freq via required opps */
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
> cpu_data->opp_table,
> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
> if (freq) {
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> continue;
> }
>
> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>
> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>
> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned long *freq)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > int i, count;
> >
> > /*
> > - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > - */
> > - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > -
> > - /*
> > * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> > * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> > */
> > @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > + */
> > + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > +
> > + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > {
> > @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> > + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>
> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
>
> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> if there is no any special reason.
>
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> > + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>
> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>
> > + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
> as following:
> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + get_online_cpus();
> > +
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>
> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> > + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> > + if (!policy) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> > + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> > + goto out;
> > + }
>
> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
> It make code more simple.
>
> > +
> > + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!cpu_state) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> > + if (!cpu_dev) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> > + ret = -ENODEV;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> > + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> > + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> > + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> > + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> > + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> > + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> > +
> > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> > + }
> > +
> > +out:
> > + put_online_cpus();
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* Update devfreq */
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret)
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + int cpu;
> > +
> > + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> > + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > +
> > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state) {
> > + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> > + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> > + kfree(cpu_state);
> > + cpu_state = NULL;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> > + &(*p_data)->nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>
> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>
>
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned int event, void *data)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> > - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > - if (!parent)
> > + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> > return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >
> > switch (event) {
> > @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > if (!p_data->this)
> > p_data->this = devfreq;
> >
> > - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > +
> > case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > default:
> > break;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> > /**
> > + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> > + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> > + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> > + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> > + *
> > + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> > + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> > + */
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> > +
> > +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> > + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > +};
> > +
> > +/**
> > * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> > * and devfreq_add_device
> > * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> > @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> > * using governors except for passive governor.
> > * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> > * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> > + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> > * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> > * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> > + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> > *
> > * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> > * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> > - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> > - * them.
> > + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> > + * will handle them.
> > */
> > struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> > @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> > int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
> >
> > + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> > + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> > +
> > /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> > struct devfreq *this;
> > struct notifier_block nb;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-31 10:46 ` Hsin-Yi Wang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Hsin-Yi Wang @ 2021-03-31 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: Andrew-sh.Cheng, MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring,
Mark Rutland, Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
Linux PM, Devicetree List,
moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support, lkml, srv_heupstream,
Sibi Sankar
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 3:58 PM Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>
> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
>
> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> Please update the email or drop this email.
>
>
> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> > From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> > CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> > cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> > power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
> >
> > To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> > passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> > of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> > (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> > to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> > current CPU frequency.
> >
> > To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> > following:
> > * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> > the parent cpu opp_table.
> >
> > * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> > the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> > max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> > device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> > in between.
> >
> > Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> > dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> > to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> > after kernel-5.7
> > Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> > since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> > [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> > drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> > 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> > device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> > through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> > devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> > + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> > + the online CPUs current frequency.
> >
> > comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> > */
> >
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> > #include <linux/device.h>
> > #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > #include "governor.h"
> >
> > -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
> > + unsigned int min_freq;
> > + unsigned int max_freq;
> > + unsigned int first_cpu;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> > +};
>
> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>
> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>
> /**
> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> *
> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> */
> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> struct device *dev;
> unsigned int first_cpu;
>
> struct opp_table *opp_table;
> unsigned int cur_freq;
> unsigned int min_freq;
> unsigned int max_freq;
> };
>
>
> > +
> > +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> > + unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> > + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> > +
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> > + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> > + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> > +
> > + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> > + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> > + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> > + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> > + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> > +
> > + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> > + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> > + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> > + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> > + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > +
> > + if (dev_freq_table) {
> > + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> > + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> > + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> > +
> > + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
() is missing for denominator?
cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) /
(cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq);
> > + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> > +
> > +out:
> > + return freq;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> > +
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> > + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> > + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> > +
> > + *freq = target_freq;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
> [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf
>
> For example but this code is not tested,
> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
> struct opp_table *opp_table,
> unsigned long freq)
> {
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>
> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
> return 0;
>
> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> return 0;
>
> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>
> if (IS_ERR(opp))
> return 0;
>
> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>
> return freq;
> }
>
> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned long *target_freq)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
> unsigned long freq = 0;
>
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
> continue;
>
> /* Get target freq via required opps */
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
> cpu_data->opp_table,
> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
> if (freq) {
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> continue;
> }
>
> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>
> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>
> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned long *freq)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > int i, count;
> >
> > /*
> > - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > - */
> > - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > -
> > - /*
> > * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> > * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> > */
> > @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > + */
> > + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > +
> > + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > {
> > @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> > + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>
> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
>
> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> if there is no any special reason.
>
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> > + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>
> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>
> > + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
> as following:
> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + get_online_cpus();
> > +
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>
> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> > + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> > + if (!policy) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> > + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> > + goto out;
> > + }
>
> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
> It make code more simple.
>
> > +
> > + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!cpu_state) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> > + if (!cpu_dev) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> > + ret = -ENODEV;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> > + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> > + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> > + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> > + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> > + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> > + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> > +
> > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> > + }
> > +
> > +out:
> > + put_online_cpus();
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* Update devfreq */
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret)
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + int cpu;
> > +
> > + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> > + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > +
> > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state) {
> > + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> > + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> > + kfree(cpu_state);
> > + cpu_state = NULL;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> > + &(*p_data)->nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>
> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>
>
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned int event, void *data)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> > - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > - if (!parent)
> > + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> > return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >
> > switch (event) {
> > @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > if (!p_data->this)
> > p_data->this = devfreq;
> >
> > - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > +
> > case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > default:
> > break;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> > /**
> > + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> > + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> > + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> > + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> > + *
> > + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> > + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> > + */
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> > +
> > +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> > + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > +};
> > +
> > +/**
> > * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> > * and devfreq_add_device
> > * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> > @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> > * using governors except for passive governor.
> > * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> > * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> > + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> > * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> > * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> > + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> > *
> > * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> > * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> > - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> > - * them.
> > + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> > + * will handle them.
> > */
> > struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> > @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> > int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
> >
> > + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> > + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> > +
> > /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> > struct devfreq *this;
> > struct notifier_block nb;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> >
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH V8 1/8] PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor
@ 2021-03-31 10:46 ` Hsin-Yi Wang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 76+ messages in thread
From: Hsin-Yi Wang @ 2021-03-31 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chanwoo Choi
Cc: Andrew-sh.Cheng, MyungJoo Ham, Kyungmin Park, Rob Herring,
Mark Rutland, Matthias Brugger, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar,
Nishanth Menon, Stephen Boyd, Liam Girdwood, Mark Brown,
Linux PM, Devicetree List,
moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support, lkml, srv_heupstream,
Sibi Sankar
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 3:58 PM Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list.
> Need to send them to linu-pm ML.
>
> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches
> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case.
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov
>
> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>' is wrong email address.
> Please update the email or drop this email.
>
>
> On 3/23/21 8:33 PM, Andrew-sh.Cheng wrote:
> > From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > Many CPU architectures have caches that can scale independent of the
> > CPUs. Frequency scaling of the caches is necessary to make sure that the
> > cache is not a performance bottleneck that leads to poor performance and
> > power. The same idea applies for RAM/DDR.
> >
> > To achieve this, this patch adds support for cpu based scaling to the
> > passive governor. This is accomplished by taking the current frequency
> > of each CPU frequency domain and then adjust the frequency of the cache
> > (or any devfreq device) based on the frequency of the CPUs. It listens
> > to CPU frequency transition notifiers to keep itself up to date on the
> > current CPU frequency.
> >
> > To decide the frequency of the device, the governor does one of the
> > following:
> > * Derives the optimal devfreq device opp from required-opps property of
> > the parent cpu opp_table.
> >
> > * Scales the device frequency in proportion to the CPU frequency. So, if
> > the CPUs are running at their max frequency, the device runs at its
> > max frequency. If the CPUs are running at their min frequency, the
> > device runs at its min frequency. It is interpolated for frequencies
> > in between.
> >
> > Andrew-sh.Cheng change
> > dev_pm_opp_xlate_opp to dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp devfreq->max_freq
> > to devfreq->user_min_freq_req.data.freq.qos->min_freq.target_value
> > after kernel-5.7
> > Don't return -EINVAL in devfreq_passive_event_handler()
> > since it doesn't handle DEVFREQ_GOV_SUSPEND DEVFREQ_GOV_RESUME cases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> > [Sibi: Integrated cpu-freqmap governor into passive_governor]
> > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew-sh.Cheng <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/devfreq/Kconfig | 2 +
> > drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > include/linux/devfreq.h | 29 +++-
> > 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > index 00704efe6398..f56132b0ae64 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/Kconfig
> > @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ config DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE
> > device. This governor does not change the frequency by itself
> > through sysfs entries. The passive governor recommends that
> > devfreq device uses the OPP table to get the frequency/voltage.
> > + Alternatively the governor can also be chosen to scale based on
> > + the online CPUs current frequency.
> >
> > comment "DEVFREQ Drivers"
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > index b094132bd20b..9cc57b083839 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_passive.c
> > @@ -8,11 +8,103 @@
> > */
> >
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> > #include <linux/device.h>
> > #include <linux/devfreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > #include "governor.h"
> >
> > -static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
> > + unsigned int min_freq;
> > + unsigned int max_freq;
> > + unsigned int first_cpu;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> > +};
>
> As I knew, the previous version has the description of structure
> as following: I wan to add the description like below.
>
> And if you have no any objection, I'd like you to order
> the variables as following and use 'dev' instead of 'cpu_dev'
> because this patch use the 'cpu_state->cpu_dev' at the multiple points.
> I think that 'cpu_state->dev' is better than 'cpu_state->cpu_dev'.
> Also, I prefer to use 'cur_freq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> because devfreq subsystem uses 'cur_freq' for expressing the 'current frequency'.
>
> /**
> * struct devfreq_cpu_state - Hold the per-cpu data
> * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> * @cur_freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> *
> * This structure stores the required cpu_data of a cpu.
> * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> */
> struct devfreq_cpu_state {
> struct device *dev;
> unsigned int first_cpu;
>
> struct opp_table *opp_table;
> unsigned int cur_freq;
> unsigned int min_freq;
> unsigned int max_freq;
> };
>
>
> > +
> > +static unsigned long xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(struct devfreq_passive_data *data,
> > + unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int cpu_min_freq, cpu_max_freq, cpu_curr_freq_khz, cpu_percent;
> > + unsigned long dev_min_freq, dev_max_freq, dev_max_state;
> > +
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + unsigned long *dev_freq_table = devfreq->profile->freq_table;
> > + struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
> > + unsigned long cpu_curr_freq, freq;
> > +
> > + if (!cpu_state || cpu_state->first_cpu != cpu ||
> > + !cpu_state->opp_table || !devfreq->opp_table)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq * 1000;
> > + p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(cpu_state->cpu_dev, &cpu_curr_freq, 0);
> > + if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(cpu_state->opp_table,
> > + devfreq->opp_table, p_opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
> > +
> > + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
> > + freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> > + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> > + cpu_min_freq = cpu_state->min_freq;
> > + cpu_max_freq = cpu_state->max_freq;
> > + cpu_curr_freq_khz = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > +
> > + if (dev_freq_table) {
> > + /* Get minimum frequency according to sorting order */
> > + dev_max_state = dev_freq_table[devfreq->profile->max_state - 1];
> > + if (dev_freq_table[0] < dev_max_state) {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_max_state;
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_freq_table[0];
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + dev_min_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MIN_FREQUENCY);
> > + dev_max_freq = dev_pm_qos_read_value(devfreq->dev.parent,
> > + DEV_PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY);
> > +
> > + if (dev_max_freq <= dev_min_freq)
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > + cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) / cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq;
() is missing for denominator?
cpu_percent = ((cpu_curr_freq_khz - cpu_min_freq) * 100) /
(cpu_max_freq - cpu_min_freq);
> > + freq = dev_min_freq + mult_frac(dev_max_freq - dev_min_freq, cpu_percent, 100);
> > +
> > +out:
> > + return freq;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + unsigned long target_freq = 0;
> > +
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> > + target_freq = max(target_freq,
> > + xlate_cpufreq_to_devfreq(p_data, cpu));
> > +
> > + *freq = target_freq;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> As you knew, governor_passive.c was already used
> both 'dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp' and 'devfreq_recommended_opp'
> to get the target from OPP. So, I wan to make the common function
> like 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following:
> If define 'get_taget_freq_by_required_opp' as following,
> it will be used for get_target_freq_with_devfreq().
> After finisied the review of this patch, I'll send the patch[2].
> [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=101c5a087586ab2b5cf3370166a7e39227ca83cf
>
> For example but this code is not tested,
> static unsigned long get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(struct device *p_dev,
> struct opp_table *p_opp_table,
> struct opp_table *opp_table,
> unsigned long freq)
> {
> struct dev_pm_opp *opp = NULL, *p_opp = NULL;
>
> if (!p_dev || !p_opp_table || !opp_table || !freq)
> return 0;
>
> p_opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(p_dev, &freq, 0);
> if (IS_ERR(p_opp))
> return 0;
>
> opp = dev_pm_opp_xlate_required_opp(p_opp_table, opp_table, p_opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(p_opp);
>
> if (IS_ERR(opp))
> return 0;
>
> freq = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>
> return freq;
> }
>
> static int get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned long *target_freq)
> {
> struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> struct devfreq_cpu_data *cpu_data;
> unsigned long cpu, cpu_cur, cpu_min, cpu_max, cpu_percent;
> unsigned long dev_min, dev_max;
> unsigned long freq = 0;
>
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> cpu_data = p_data->cpu_data[cpu];
> if (!cpu_data || cpu_data->first_cpu != cpu)
> continue;
>
> /* Get target freq via required opps */
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq * HZ_PER_KHZ;
> freq = get_taget_freq_by_required_opp(cpu_data->dev,
> cpu_data->opp_table,
> devfreq->opp_table, cpu_cur);
> if (freq) {
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> continue;
> }
>
> /* Use Interpolation if required opps is not available */
> devfreq_get_freq_range(devfreq, &dev_min, &dev_max);
>
> cpu_min = cpu_data->min_freq;
> cpu_max = cpu_data->max_freq;
> cpu_cur = cpu_data->cur_freq;
>
> cpu_percent = ((cpu_cur - cpu_min) * 100) / cpu_max - cpu_min;
> freq = dev_min + mult_frac(dev_max - dev_min, cpu_percent, 100);
>
> *target_freq = max(freq, *target_freq);
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> > +
> > +static int get_target_freq_with_devfreq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned long *freq)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > @@ -23,14 +115,6 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > int i, count;
> >
> > /*
> > - * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > - * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > - * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > - */
> > - if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > - return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > -
> > - /*
> > * If the parent and passive devfreq device uses the OPP table,
> > * get the next frequency by using the OPP table.
> > */
> > @@ -98,6 +182,37 @@ static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int devfreq_passive_get_target_freq(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > + unsigned long *freq)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data =
> > + (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the devfreq device with passive governor has the specific method
> > + * to determine the next frequency, should use the get_target_freq()
> > + * of struct devfreq_passive_data.
> > + */
> > + if (p_data->get_target_freq)
> > + return p_data->get_target_freq(devfreq, freq);
> > +
> > + switch (p_data->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_devfreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = get_target_freq_with_cpufreq(devfreq, freq);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Invalid parent type\n");
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > {
> > @@ -130,16 +245,200 @@ static int devfreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_notifier_call(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data =
> > + container_of(nb, struct devfreq_passive_data, nb);
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_freqs *cpu_freq = ptr;
>
> Use 'freqs' variable name. I prefer to use the same variable name
> for both devfreq_freqs and cpufreq_freqs instance.
>
> > + unsigned int curr_freq;
>
> As I commented above, better to use 'cur_frq' instead of 'curr_freq'
> if there is no any special reason.
>
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (event != CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE || !cpu_freq ||
> > + !data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu])
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu_freq->policy->cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state->curr_freq == cpu_freq->new)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + /* Backup current freq and pre-update cpu state freq*/
>
> I think that this commnet is not critial. So, please drop this comment.
>
> > + curr_freq = cpu_state->curr_freq;
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = cpu_freq->new;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> I recommend to use 'devfreq_update_target' instead of 'update_devfreq'
> as following:
> devfreq_update_target(devfreq, freqs->new);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = curr_freq;
> > + dev_err(&devfreq->dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_register(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> In order to keep the consistent style of function name,
> please change the name as following because devfreq defines
> the function name as 'devfreq_regiter_notifier'
> - cpufreq_passive_register -> cpufreq_passive_register_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq *devfreq = (struct devfreq *)data->this;
> > + struct device *dev = devfreq->dev.parent;
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table = NULL;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> > + struct device *cpu_dev;
> > + unsigned int cpu;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + get_online_cpus();
> > +
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = cpufreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't register cpufreq notifier.\n");
> > + data->nb.notifier_call = NULL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Populate devfreq_cpu_state */
>
> Don't need this comment. Please drop it.
>
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> > + if (data->cpu_state[cpu])
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> > + if (!policy) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (PTR_ERR(policy) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> > + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else if (IS_ERR(policy)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(policy);
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get the cpufreq_poliy.\n");
> > + goto out;
> > + }
>
> Use dev_err_probe() funciotn to handle hte EPROBE_DEFER.
> It make code more simple.
>
> > +
> > + cpu_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!cpu_state) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> > + if (!cpu_dev) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get cpu device.\n");
> > + ret = -ENODEV;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(cpu_dev);
> > + if (IS_ERR(devfreq->opp_table)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpu_state->cpu_dev = cpu_dev;
> > + cpu_state->opp_table = opp_table;
> > + cpu_state->first_cpu = cpumask_first(policy->related_cpus);
> > + cpu_state->curr_freq = policy->cur;
> > + cpu_state->min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.min_freq;
> > + cpu_state->max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq;
> > + data->cpu_state[cpu] = cpu_state;
> > +
> > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> > + }
> > +
> > +out:
> > + put_online_cpus();
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* Update devfreq */
> > + mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + ret = update_devfreq(devfreq);
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> > + if (ret)
> > + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't update the frequency.\n");
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpufreq_passive_unregister(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
>
> As I commented above, please change the name as following:
> - cpufreq_passive_unregister -> cpufreq_passive_unregister_notifier
>
> > +{
> > + struct devfreq_passive_data *data = *p_data;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state;
> > + int cpu;
> > +
> > + if (data->nb.notifier_call)
> > + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(&data->nb,
> > + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > +
> > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > + cpu_state = data->cpu_state[cpu];
> > + if (cpu_state) {
> > + if (cpu_state->opp_table)
> > + dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(cpu_state->opp_table);
> > + kfree(cpu_state);
> > + cpu_state = NULL;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int register_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + struct notifier_block *nb = &(*p_data)->nb;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > + ret = devfreq_register_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent, nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + ret = cpufreq_passive_register(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int unregister_parent_dev_notifier(struct devfreq_passive_data **p_data)
> > +{
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + switch ((*p_data)->parent_type) {
> > + case DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier((struct devfreq *)(*p_data)->parent,
> > + &(*p_data)->nb,
> > + DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + break;
> > + case CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV:
> > + cpufreq_passive_unregister(p_data);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> I think that you don't need to define register_parent_dev_notifier
> and unregister_parent_dev_notifier as the separate functions.
>
> Instead of the separate functions, just add the code
> into devfreq_passive_event_handler.
>
>
> > +
> > static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > unsigned int event, void *data)
> > {
> > struct devfreq_passive_data *p_data
> > = (struct devfreq_passive_data *)devfreq->data;
> > struct devfreq *parent = (struct devfreq *)p_data->parent;
> > - struct notifier_block *nb = &p_data->nb;
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > - if (!parent)
> > + if (p_data->parent_type == DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV && !parent)
> > return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >
> > switch (event) {
> > @@ -147,13 +446,11 @@ static int devfreq_passive_event_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> > if (!p_data->this)
> > p_data->this = devfreq;
> >
> > - nb->notifier_call = devfreq_passive_notifier_call;
> > - ret = devfreq_register_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > + ret = register_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > +
> > case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > - WARN_ON(devfreq_unregister_notifier(parent, nb,
> > - DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER));
> > + ret = unregister_parent_dev_notifier(&p_data);
> > break;
> > default:
> > break;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > index 26ea0850be9b..e0093b7c805c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> > @@ -280,6 +280,25 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> >
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVFREQ_GOV_PASSIVE)
> > /**
> > + * struct devfreq_cpu_state - holds the per-cpu state
> > + * @freq: the current frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @min_freq: the min frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @max_freq: the max frequency of the cpu.
> > + * @first_cpu: the cpumask of the first cpu of a policy.
> > + * @dev: reference to cpu device.
> > + * @opp_table: reference to cpu opp table.
> > + *
> > + * This structure stores the required cpu_state of a cpu.
> > + * This is auto-populated by the governor.
> > + */
> > +struct devfreq_cpu_state;
> > +
> > +enum devfreq_parent_dev_type {
> > + DEVFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > + CPUFREQ_PARENT_DEV,
> > +};
> > +
> > +/**
> > * struct devfreq_passive_data - ``void *data`` fed to struct devfreq
> > * and devfreq_add_device
> > * @parent: the devfreq instance of parent device.
> > @@ -290,13 +309,15 @@ struct devfreq_simple_ondemand_data {
> > * using governors except for passive governor.
> > * If the devfreq device has the specific method to decide
> > * the next frequency, should use this callback.
> > + * @parent_type: parent type of the device
> > * @this: the devfreq instance of own device.
> > * @nb: the notifier block for DEVFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER list
> > + * @cpu_state: the state min/max/current frequency of all online cpu's
> > *
> > * The devfreq_passive_data have to set the devfreq instance of parent
> > * device with governors except for the passive governor. But, don't need to
> > - * initialize the 'this' and 'nb' field because the devfreq core will handle
> > - * them.
> > + * initialize the 'this', 'nb' and 'cpu_state' field because the devfreq core
> > + * will handle them.
> > */
> > struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Should set the devfreq instance of parent device */
> > @@ -305,9 +326,13 @@ struct devfreq_passive_data {
> > /* Optional callback to decide the next frequency of passvice device */
> > int (*get_target_freq)(struct devfreq *this, unsigned long *freq);
> >
> > + /* Should set the type of parent device */
> > + enum devfreq_parent_dev_type parent_type;
> > +
> > /* For passive governor's internal use. Don't need to set them */
> > struct devfreq *this;
> > struct notifier_block nb;
> > + struct devfreq_cpu_state *cpu_state[NR_CPUS];
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 76+ messages in thread