linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yu Chen <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
	Gabriele Mazzotta <gabriele.mzt@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFT][Update][PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Update max CPU frequency on global turbo changes
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2019 22:39:28 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190304143928.GA13701@chenyu-office.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3017597.CVkTxgYgAs@aspire.rjw.lan>

On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 01:57:06PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> 
> While the cpuinfo.max_freq value doesn't really matter for
> intel_pstate in the active mode, in the passive mode it is used by
> governors as the maximum physical frequency of the CPU and the
> results of governor computations generally depend on it.  Also it
> is made available to user space via sysfs and it should match the
> current HW configuration.
> 
> For this reason, make intel_pstate update cpuinfo.max_freq for all
> CPUs if it detects a global change of turbo frequency settings from
> "disable" to "enable" or the other way associated with a _PPC change
> notification from the platform firmware.
> 
> Note that policy_is_inactive() and cpufreq_set_policy() need to be
> made available to it for this purpose.
> 
> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200759
> Reported-by: Gabriele Mazzotta <gabriele.mzt@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> ---
> 
> Update, because the patch sent previously doesn't build, due to an extra
> arg declared for intel_pstate_update_max_freq().
> 
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c      |   12 ++----------
>  drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c |   33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  include/linux/cpufreq.h        |    7 +++++++
>  3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> @@ -897,6 +897,36 @@ static void intel_pstate_update_policies
>  		cpufreq_update_policy(cpu);
>  }
>  
> +static void intel_pstate_update_max_freq(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +	struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> +	struct cpufreq_policy new_policy;
> +	struct cpudata *cpudata;
> +
> +	if (!policy)
> +		return;
> +
> +	down_write(&policy->rwsem);
> +
> +	if (policy_is_inactive(policy))
> +		goto unlock;
> +
> +	cpudata = all_cpu_data[cpu];
> +	policy->cpuinfo.max_freq = global.turbo_disabled_upd ?
> +			cpudata->pstate.max_freq : cpudata->pstate.turbo_freq;
> +
> +	memcpy(&new_policy, policy, sizeof(*policy));
> +	new_policy.max = min(policy->user_policy.max, policy->cpuinfo.max_freq);
> +	new_policy.min = min(policy->user_policy.min, new_policy.max);
> +
> +	cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);
> +
> +unlock:
> +	up_write(&policy->rwsem);
> +
> +	cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> +}
> +
I tried to test on a macbook in hand however I did not see the _PPC
notifier on this machine so it might not cover the code path in
this patch. I checked the cpufreq with this patch using
different load and the cpufreq scales well.

>  static void intel_pstate_update_limits(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
>  	mutex_lock(&intel_pstate_driver_lock);
> @@ -908,7 +938,8 @@ static void intel_pstate_update_limits(u
>  	 */
>  	if (global.turbo_disabled_upd != global.turbo_disabled) {
>  		global.turbo_disabled_upd = global.turbo_disabled;
> -		intel_pstate_update_policies();
> +		for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
> +			intel_pstate_update_max_freq(cpu);
>  	} else {
>  		cpufreq_update_policy(cpu);
>  	}
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -34,11 +34,6 @@
>  
>  static LIST_HEAD(cpufreq_policy_list);
>  
> -static inline bool policy_is_inactive(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> -{
> -	return cpumask_empty(policy->cpus);
> -}
> -
>  /* Macros to iterate over CPU policies */
>  #define for_each_suitable_policy(__policy, __active)			 \
>  	list_for_each_entry(__policy, &cpufreq_policy_list, policy_list) \
> @@ -675,9 +670,6 @@ static ssize_t show_scaling_cur_freq(str
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> -static int cpufreq_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> -				struct cpufreq_policy *new_policy);
> -
>  /**
>   * cpufreq_per_cpu_attr_write() / store_##file_name() - sysfs write access
>   */
> @@ -2235,8 +2227,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpufreq_get_policy);
>   *
>   * The cpuinfo part of @policy is not updated by this function.
>   */
There first seems to be some patching error when applying this on
top of upstream 5.0, but I realized that this patch is based on
intel-next.

Thanks,
Ryan

> -static int cpufreq_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> -			      struct cpufreq_policy *new_policy)
> +int cpufreq_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> +		       struct cpufreq_policy *new_policy)
>  {
>  	struct cpufreq_governor *old_gov;
>  	int ret;
> Index: linux-pm/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> +++ linux-pm/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> @@ -178,6 +178,11 @@ static inline struct cpufreq_policy *cpu
>  static inline void cpufreq_cpu_put(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) { }
>  #endif
>  
> +static inline bool policy_is_inactive(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> +{
> +	return cpumask_empty(policy->cpus);
> +}
> +
>  static inline bool policy_is_shared(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  {
>  	return cpumask_weight(policy->cpus) > 1;
> @@ -194,6 +199,8 @@ void disable_cpufreq(void);
>  
>  u64 get_cpu_idle_time(unsigned int cpu, u64 *wall, int io_busy);
>  int cpufreq_get_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu);
> +int cpufreq_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> +		       struct cpufreq_policy *new_policy);
>  void cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu);
>  void cpufreq_update_limits(unsigned int cpu);
>  bool have_governor_per_policy(void);
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2019-03-04 14:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-01 12:43 [RFT][PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Handle _PPC updates on global turbo disable/enable Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-01 12:45 ` [RFT][PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Driver-specific handling of _PPC updates Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-01 12:47 ` [RFT][PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Update max CPU frequency on global turbo changes Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-01 12:57   ` [RFT][Update][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-04 14:39     ` Yu Chen [this message]
2019-03-05 10:42     ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-05 10:50       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-05 10:58         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-05 11:44           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-05 11:52             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-05 12:00             ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-05 12:24               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-05 17:02               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-05 17:37                 ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-06 10:05                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-07 11:02                     ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-07 11:23                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-07 11:49                         ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-07 11:25                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-07 11:59                         ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-05 11:01         ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-01 17:39 ` [RFT][PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Handle _PPC updates on global turbo disable/enable Srinivas Pandruvada
2019-03-02 10:30   ` Yu Chen
2019-03-02 16:24     ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2019-03-03 17:03   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-03 21:20     ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2019-03-03 21:51       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-04  4:06         ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2019-03-04  9:41           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-04 18:06             ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2019-03-04 21:57               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-04 23:04                 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2019-03-05  8:40                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-03 22:42 ` Gabriele Mazzotta
2019-03-04  9:58   ` Rafael J. Wysocki

Reply instructions:

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

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

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

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190304143928.GA13701@chenyu-office.sh.intel.com \
    --to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=gabriele.mzt@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

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

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: 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).