linux-pm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH V3 2/5] cpufreq: Don't skip frequency validation for has_target() drivers
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 10:46:55 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <88da7cfabad5e19a361fe2843e5ef547d50fd221.1561698236.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88da7cfabad5e19a361fe2843e5ef547d50fd221.1560999838.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS was introduced in a very old commit from pre-2.6
kernel release by commit 6a4a93f9c0d5 ("[CPUFREQ] Fix 'out of sync'
issue").

If we you look at that commit, it does two things:

- It adds the frequency verification code (which is quite similar to
  what we have today as well).

- And it sets the CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS flag only for setpolicy drivers,
  rightly so based on the code we had then. The idea was to avoid
  frequency validation for setpolicy drivers as the cpufreq core doesn't
  know what frequency the hardware is running at and so no point in
  doing frequency verification.

The problem happened when we started to use the same CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS
flag for constant loops-per-jiffy thing as well and many has_target()
drivers started using the same flag and unknowingly skipped the
verification of frequency. There is no logical reason behind skipping
frequency validation because of the presence of CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS
flag otherwise.

This patch fixes this issue by skipping frequency validation only for
setpolicy drivers and always doing it for has_target() drivers
irrespective of the presence or absence of CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS flag.

cpufreq_notify_transition() is only called for has_target() type driver
and not for set_policy type, and the check is simply redundant. Remove
it as well.

Also remove () around freq comparison statement as they aren't required
and checkpatch also warns for them.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
---
V2->V3:
- Updated commit log and $subject.

 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++--------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 54befd775bd6..41ac701e324f 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -359,12 +359,10 @@ static void cpufreq_notify_transition(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
 		 * which is not equal to what the cpufreq core thinks is
 		 * "old frequency".
 		 */
-		if (!(cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS)) {
-			if (policy->cur && (policy->cur != freqs->old)) {
-				pr_debug("Warning: CPU frequency is %u, cpufreq assumed %u kHz\n",
-					 freqs->old, policy->cur);
-				freqs->old = policy->cur;
-			}
+		if (policy->cur && policy->cur != freqs->old) {
+			pr_debug("Warning: CPU frequency is %u, cpufreq assumed %u kHz\n",
+				 freqs->old, policy->cur);
+			freqs->old = policy->cur;
 		}
 
 		srcu_notifier_call_chain(&cpufreq_transition_notifier_list,
@@ -1618,8 +1616,7 @@ static unsigned int __cpufreq_get(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
 	if (policy->fast_switch_enabled)
 		return ret_freq;
 
-	if (ret_freq && policy->cur &&
-		!(cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS)) {
+	if (has_target() && ret_freq && policy->cur) {
 		/* verify no discrepancy between actual and
 					saved value exists */
 		if (unlikely(ret_freq != policy->cur)) {
-- 
2.21.0.rc0.269.g1a574e7a288b


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-06-28  5:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-20  3:05 [PATCH V2 0/5] cpufreq: cleanups Viresh Kumar
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 1/5] cpufreq: Remove the redundant !setpolicy check Viresh Kumar
2019-06-27 21:52   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 2/5] cpufreq: Replace few CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS checks with has_target() Viresh Kumar
2019-06-27  5:00   ` Viresh Kumar
2019-06-27  9:52     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-28  5:16   ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 3/5] cpufreq: Use has_target() instead of !setpolicy Viresh Kumar
2019-06-27 21:52   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 4/5] cpufreq: Reuse cpufreq_update_current_freq() in __cpufreq_get() Viresh Kumar
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 5/5] cpufreq: Avoid calling cpufreq_verify_current_freq() from handle_update() Viresh Kumar

Reply instructions:

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

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

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

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=88da7cfabad5e19a361fe2843e5ef547d50fd221.1561698236.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

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

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).