From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Douglas RAILLARD <douglas.raillard@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
qperret@qperret.net, patrick.bellasi@matbug.net,
dh.han@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/6] sched/cpufreq: Attach perf domain to sugov policy
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 10:57:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ebf6419-c8e0-3998-41e0-3f7b49b34084@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191011134500.235736-3-douglas.raillard@arm.com>
On 11/10/2019 15:44, Douglas RAILLARD wrote:
[...]
> @@ -66,6 +70,38 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sugov_cpu, sugov_cpu);
>
> /************************ Governor internals ***********************/
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL
> +static void sugov_policy_attach_pd(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
> +{
> + struct em_perf_domain *pd;
> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = sg_policy->policy;
Shouldn't always order local variable declarations from longest to
shortest line?
> +
> + sg_policy->pd = NULL;
> + pd = em_cpu_get(policy->cpu);
> + if (!pd)
> + return;
> +
> + if (cpumask_equal(policy->related_cpus, to_cpumask(pd->cpus)))
> + sg_policy->pd = pd;
> + else
> + pr_warn("%s: Not all CPUs in schedutil policy %u share the same perf domain, no perf domain for that policy will be registered\n",
> + __func__, policy->cpu);
Maybe {} because of 2 lines?
> +}
> +
> +static struct em_perf_domain *sugov_policy_get_pd(
> + struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
Maybe this way? This format is already used in this file.
static struct em_perf_domain *
sugov_policy_get_pd(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
> +{
> + return sg_policy->pd;
> +}
> +#else /* CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL */
> +static void sugov_policy_attach_pd(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy) {}
> +static struct em_perf_domain *sugov_policy_get_pd(
> + struct sugov_policy *sg_policy)
> +{
> + return NULL;
> +}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL */
> +
> static bool sugov_should_update_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time)
> {
> s64 delta_ns;
> @@ -859,6 +895,9 @@ static int sugov_start(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> sugov_update_shared :
> sugov_update_single);
> }
> +
> + sugov_policy_attach_pd(sg_policy);
> +
> return 0;
> }
A sugov_policy_detach_pd() called from sugov_stop() (doing for instance
the g_policy->pd = NULL) is not needed?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-17 8:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-11 13:44 [RFC PATCH v3 0/6] sched/cpufreq: Make schedutil energy aware Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/6] PM: Introduce em_pd_get_higher_freq() Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-17 8:57 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-17 9:58 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-17 11:09 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/6] sched/cpufreq: Attach perf domain to sugov policy Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-17 8:57 ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2019-10-17 10:22 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/6] sched/cpufreq: Hook em_pd_get_higher_power() into get_next_freq() Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/6] sched/cpufreq: Introduce sugov_cpu_ramp_boost Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-14 14:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-14 15:32 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-17 8:57 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-17 11:19 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-11 13:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 5/6] sched/cpufreq: Boost schedutil frequency ramp up Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-17 9:21 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-11 13:45 ` [RFC PATCH v3 6/6] sched/cpufreq: Add schedutil_em_tp tracepoint Douglas RAILLARD
2019-10-14 14:53 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/6] sched/cpufreq: Make schedutil energy aware Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-14 15:50 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-17 9:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-17 11:11 ` Quentin Perret
2019-10-17 14:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-18 7:44 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-18 7:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-18 17:24 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-18 8:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-17 14:23 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-17 14:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-17 19:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-18 11:46 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-18 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-18 14:44 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-18 15:15 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-10-18 16:03 ` Douglas Raillard
2019-10-18 15:20 ` Vincent Guittot
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=4ebf6419-c8e0-3998-41e0-3f7b49b34084@arm.com \
--to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=dh.han@samsung.com \
--cc=douglas.raillard@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qperret@qperret.net \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--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).