From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E738CC433DF for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 18:37:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5AD720702 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 18:37:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1593542267; bh=fkRM6htIHLO0nAmdSddtZqcErSqrnOOxacEtFc8Q7Bg=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=vpGwqgfgwu9DdkAFScJwxiTAxqYbcLvcARtxgC90L0lydmMb/emtMfyC3pzNCQc/l wLwyMPCNt7HDmvRGbiC2bj5pxrqw90o6V2AkCT14pyOXk3F4wkWvsEispo/2NT/iSz rYuzh3mDthgcbVCCvj/3SXos7jKG/pFZIT57Z9io= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729097AbgF3Shr (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 14:37:47 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f66.google.com ([209.85.210.66]:42831 "EHLO mail-ot1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725963AbgF3Shr (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 14:37:47 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f66.google.com with SMTP id 76so4807930otu.9; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:37:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+qDEyqS8NE3oxK3prUz3RFXZ5fxmePBlSyhV2vUSR+Q=; b=VWAR2HIrilq+maXmrHUWNQ8MjJU6dFDHH1vhD/KMFptE2pmPYv0S5yagkGhic25nfu iOKxNUVXYyEsPgNVy2kYhATEqdqUSIOwFpLyJclHH02lkTD7NVny2j/HVTCzBmJrNAog D+c+iKzpW4t9P5zPLfFChN0fKdORkXGuXbtM+xsazSRvywm5JbwiBarj2qbZRoAuWRgb rR4qzOIYsVvRDuxGMRHi75S7JGlpcCRvzx8U4pW2UDz3FogmRZm8t4IJ+rBXXDO0VtO+ gSbQoe17cZYGxFaAiYv2ClVXGWIpTMhfyLjMgTvPTYod2aKwBIav5s5D2ycmtAUTU1RK ONRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533aytCsau5gAledXbnvOp37EFRZUFfsq4pWtlS+PKMIQVkSkvLY PAEwKfhB/y3EqPD2UskTagSW1zGHP4eJ1R8JoF4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzarDlb+hklbsYImIVV9e+FkSn+Fib8wLTdLmfPuUKv5CsNUzd3PRFgygvj0YhPd75oNE26pMl/5znGaWv3gWw= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7d15:: with SMTP id v21mr18548733otn.118.1593542265559; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:37:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 20:37:34 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: cppc: Reorder code and remove apply_hisi_workaround variable To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Rafael Wysocki , Xiongfeng Wang , Linux PM , Vincent Guittot , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 7:15 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > With the current approach we have an extra check in the > cppc_cpufreq_get_rate() callback, which checks if hisilicon's get rate > implementation should be used instead. While it works fine, the approach > isn't very straight forward, over that we have an extra check in the > routine. > > Rearrange code and update the cpufreq driver's get() callback pointer > directly for the hisilicon case. This gets the extra variable is removed > and the extra check isn't required anymore as well. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > --- > Xiongfeng Wang, will it be possible for you to give this a try as I > can't really test it locally. > > drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 91 ++++++++++++++++------------------ > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > index 257d726a4456..03a21daddbec 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > @@ -45,8 +45,6 @@ struct cppc_workaround_oem_info { > u32 oem_revision; > }; > > -static bool apply_hisi_workaround; > - > static struct cppc_workaround_oem_info wa_info[] = { > { > .oem_id = "HISI ", > @@ -59,50 +57,6 @@ static struct cppc_workaround_oem_info wa_info[] = { > } > }; > > -static unsigned int cppc_cpufreq_perf_to_khz(struct cppc_cpudata *cpu, > - unsigned int perf); > - > -/* > - * HISI platform does not support delivered performance counter and > - * reference performance counter. It can calculate the performance using the > - * platform specific mechanism. We reuse the desired performance register to > - * store the real performance calculated by the platform. > - */ > -static unsigned int hisi_cppc_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpunum) > -{ > - struct cppc_cpudata *cpudata = all_cpu_data[cpunum]; > - u64 desired_perf; > - int ret; > - > - ret = cppc_get_desired_perf(cpunum, &desired_perf); > - if (ret < 0) > - return -EIO; > - > - return cppc_cpufreq_perf_to_khz(cpudata, desired_perf); > -} > - > -static void cppc_check_hisi_workaround(void) > -{ > - struct acpi_table_header *tbl; > - acpi_status status = AE_OK; > - int i; > - > - status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_PCCT, 0, &tbl); > - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !tbl) > - return; > - > - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(wa_info); i++) { > - if (!memcmp(wa_info[i].oem_id, tbl->oem_id, ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE) && > - !memcmp(wa_info[i].oem_table_id, tbl->oem_table_id, ACPI_OEM_TABLE_ID_SIZE) && > - wa_info[i].oem_revision == tbl->oem_revision) { > - apply_hisi_workaround = true; > - break; > - } > - } > - > - acpi_put_table(tbl); > -} > - > /* Callback function used to retrieve the max frequency from DMI */ > static void cppc_find_dmi_mhz(const struct dmi_header *dm, void *private) > { > @@ -402,9 +356,6 @@ static unsigned int cppc_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpunum) > struct cppc_cpudata *cpu = all_cpu_data[cpunum]; > int ret; > > - if (apply_hisi_workaround) > - return hisi_cppc_cpufreq_get_rate(cpunum); > - > ret = cppc_get_perf_ctrs(cpunum, &fb_ctrs_t0); > if (ret) > return ret; > @@ -455,6 +406,48 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver cppc_cpufreq_driver = { > .name = "cppc_cpufreq", > }; > > +/* > + * HISI platform does not support delivered performance counter and > + * reference performance counter. It can calculate the performance using the > + * platform specific mechanism. We reuse the desired performance register to > + * store the real performance calculated by the platform. > + */ > +static unsigned int hisi_cppc_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpunum) > +{ > + struct cppc_cpudata *cpudata = all_cpu_data[cpunum]; > + u64 desired_perf; > + int ret; > + > + ret = cppc_get_desired_perf(cpunum, &desired_perf); > + if (ret < 0) > + return -EIO; > + > + return cppc_cpufreq_perf_to_khz(cpudata, desired_perf); > +} > + > +static void cppc_check_hisi_workaround(void) > +{ > + struct acpi_table_header *tbl; > + acpi_status status = AE_OK; > + int i; > + > + status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_PCCT, 0, &tbl); > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !tbl) > + return; > + > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(wa_info); i++) { > + if (!memcmp(wa_info[i].oem_id, tbl->oem_id, ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE) && > + !memcmp(wa_info[i].oem_table_id, tbl->oem_table_id, ACPI_OEM_TABLE_ID_SIZE) && > + wa_info[i].oem_revision == tbl->oem_revision) { > + /* Overwrite the get() callback */ > + cppc_cpufreq_driver.get = hisi_cppc_cpufreq_get_rate; > + break; > + } > + } > + > + acpi_put_table(tbl); > +} > + > static int __init cppc_cpufreq_init(void) > { > int i, ret = 0; > -- Applied as 5.9 material, thanks!