* [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: hybrid: Fix build with CONFIG_ACPI unset
@ 2021-05-26 15:01 Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-05-26 16:10 ` Randy Dunlap
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2021-05-26 15:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux PM; +Cc: LKML, Srinivas Pandruvada, Chen Yu, Randy Dunlap
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
One of the previous commits introducing hybrid processor support to
intel_pstate broke build with CONFIG_ACPI unset.
Fix that and while at it fix up empty stubs of two functions related
to ACPI CPPC.
Fixes: eb3693f0521e ("cpufreq: intel_pstate: hybrid: CPU-specific scaling factor")
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
@@ -385,9 +385,14 @@ static int intel_pstate_get_cppc_gurante
}
#else /* CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB */
-static void intel_pstate_set_itmt_prio(int cpu)
+static inline void intel_pstate_set_itmt_prio(int cpu)
{
}
+
+static inline int intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed(int cpu)
+{
+ return -ENOTSUPP;
+}
#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB */
static void intel_pstate_init_acpi_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
@@ -470,27 +475,6 @@ static void intel_pstate_exit_perf_limit
acpi_processor_unregister_performance(policy->cpu);
}
-#else /* CONFIG_ACPI */
-static inline void intel_pstate_init_acpi_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
-}
-
-static inline void intel_pstate_exit_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
-}
-
-static inline bool intel_pstate_acpi_pm_profile_server(void)
-{
- return false;
-}
-#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */
-
-#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB
-static int intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed(int cpu)
-{
- return -ENOTSUPP;
-}
-#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB */
static bool intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(u32 perf, struct cppc_perf_caps *caps)
{
@@ -505,6 +489,20 @@ static bool intel_pstate_cppc_perf_caps(
return caps->highest_perf && caps->lowest_perf <= caps->highest_perf;
}
+#else /* CONFIG_ACPI */
+static inline void intel_pstate_init_acpi_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
+{
+}
+
+static inline void intel_pstate_exit_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
+{
+}
+
+static inline bool intel_pstate_acpi_pm_profile_server(void)
+{
+ return false;
+}
+#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */
static void intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(struct cpudata *cpu)
{
@@ -530,7 +528,6 @@ static void intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf
*/
static void intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_calibrate(struct cpudata *cpu)
{
- struct cppc_perf_caps caps;
int perf_ctl_max_phys = cpu->pstate.max_pstate_physical;
int perf_ctl_scaling = cpu->pstate.perf_ctl_scaling;
int perf_ctl_turbo = pstate_funcs.get_turbo();
@@ -548,33 +545,39 @@ static void intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_cali
pr_debug("CPU%d: HWP_CAP guaranteed = %d\n", cpu->cpu, cpu->pstate.max_pstate);
pr_debug("CPU%d: HWP_CAP highest = %d\n", cpu->cpu, cpu->pstate.turbo_pstate);
- if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_caps(cpu, &caps)) {
- if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(caps.nominal_perf, &caps)) {
- pr_debug("CPU%d: Using CPPC nominal\n", cpu->cpu);
-
- /*
- * If the CPPC nominal performance is valid, it can be
- * assumed to correspond to cpu_khz.
- */
- if (caps.nominal_perf == perf_ctl_max_phys) {
- intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(cpu);
- return;
- }
- scaling = DIV_ROUND_UP(cpu_khz, caps.nominal_perf);
- } else if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(caps.guaranteed_perf, &caps)) {
- pr_debug("CPU%d: Using CPPC guaranteed\n", cpu->cpu);
-
- /*
- * If the CPPC guaranteed performance is valid, it can
- * be assumed to correspond to max_freq.
- */
- if (caps.guaranteed_perf == perf_ctl_max) {
- intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(cpu);
- return;
+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB)) {
+ struct cppc_perf_caps caps;
+
+ if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_caps(cpu, &caps)) {
+ if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(caps.nominal_perf, &caps)) {
+ pr_debug("CPU%d: Using CPPC nominal\n", cpu->cpu);
+
+ /*
+ * If the CPPC nominal performance is valid, it
+ * can be assumed to correspond to cpu_khz.
+ */
+ if (caps.nominal_perf == perf_ctl_max_phys) {
+ intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(cpu);
+ return;
+ }
+ scaling = DIV_ROUND_UP(cpu_khz, caps.nominal_perf);
+ } else if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(caps.guaranteed_perf, &caps)) {
+ pr_debug("CPU%d: Using CPPC guaranteed\n", cpu->cpu);
+
+ /*
+ * If the CPPC guaranteed performance is valid,
+ * it can be assumed to correspond to max_freq.
+ */
+ if (caps.guaranteed_perf == perf_ctl_max) {
+ intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(cpu);
+ return;
+ }
+ scaling = DIV_ROUND_UP(max_freq, caps.guaranteed_perf);
}
- scaling = DIV_ROUND_UP(max_freq, caps.guaranteed_perf);
}
}
+#endif
/*
* If using the CPPC data to compute the HWP-to-frequency scaling factor
* doesn't work, use the HWP_CAP gauranteed perf for this purpose with
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: hybrid: Fix build with CONFIG_ACPI unset
2021-05-26 15:01 [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: hybrid: Fix build with CONFIG_ACPI unset Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2021-05-26 16:10 ` Randy Dunlap
2021-05-26 17:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Randy Dunlap @ 2021-05-26 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Linux PM; +Cc: LKML, Srinivas Pandruvada, Chen Yu
On 5/26/21 8:01 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>
> One of the previous commits introducing hybrid processor support to
> intel_pstate broke build with CONFIG_ACPI unset.
>
> Fix that and while at it fix up empty stubs of two functions related
> to ACPI CPPC.
>
> Fixes: eb3693f0521e ("cpufreq: intel_pstate: hybrid: CPU-specific scaling factor")
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Hi Rafael,
I still have this build error:
../drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c: In function ‘show_base_frequency’:
../drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c:950:10: error: implicit declaration of function ‘intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed’; did you mean ‘intel_pstate_get_epp’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
ratio = intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed(policy->cpu);
BTW: s/guranteed/guaranteed/g
Thanks.
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> @@ -385,9 +385,14 @@ static int intel_pstate_get_cppc_gurante
> }
>
> #else /* CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB */
> -static void intel_pstate_set_itmt_prio(int cpu)
> +static inline void intel_pstate_set_itmt_prio(int cpu)
> {
> }
> +
> +static inline int intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed(int cpu)
> +{
> + return -ENOTSUPP;
> +}
> #endif /* CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB */
>
> static void intel_pstate_init_acpi_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> @@ -470,27 +475,6 @@ static void intel_pstate_exit_perf_limit
>
> acpi_processor_unregister_performance(policy->cpu);
> }
> -#else /* CONFIG_ACPI */
> -static inline void intel_pstate_init_acpi_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> -{
> -}
> -
> -static inline void intel_pstate_exit_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> -{
> -}
> -
> -static inline bool intel_pstate_acpi_pm_profile_server(void)
> -{
> - return false;
> -}
> -#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */
> -
> -#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB
> -static int intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed(int cpu)
> -{
> - return -ENOTSUPP;
> -}
> -#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB */
>
> static bool intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(u32 perf, struct cppc_perf_caps *caps)
> {
> @@ -505,6 +489,20 @@ static bool intel_pstate_cppc_perf_caps(
>
> return caps->highest_perf && caps->lowest_perf <= caps->highest_perf;
> }
> +#else /* CONFIG_ACPI */
> +static inline void intel_pstate_init_acpi_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> +{
> +}
> +
> +static inline void intel_pstate_exit_perf_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> +{
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool intel_pstate_acpi_pm_profile_server(void)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */
>
> static void intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(struct cpudata *cpu)
> {
> @@ -530,7 +528,6 @@ static void intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf
> */
> static void intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_calibrate(struct cpudata *cpu)
> {
> - struct cppc_perf_caps caps;
> int perf_ctl_max_phys = cpu->pstate.max_pstate_physical;
> int perf_ctl_scaling = cpu->pstate.perf_ctl_scaling;
> int perf_ctl_turbo = pstate_funcs.get_turbo();
> @@ -548,33 +545,39 @@ static void intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_cali
> pr_debug("CPU%d: HWP_CAP guaranteed = %d\n", cpu->cpu, cpu->pstate.max_pstate);
> pr_debug("CPU%d: HWP_CAP highest = %d\n", cpu->cpu, cpu->pstate.turbo_pstate);
>
> - if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_caps(cpu, &caps)) {
> - if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(caps.nominal_perf, &caps)) {
> - pr_debug("CPU%d: Using CPPC nominal\n", cpu->cpu);
> -
> - /*
> - * If the CPPC nominal performance is valid, it can be
> - * assumed to correspond to cpu_khz.
> - */
> - if (caps.nominal_perf == perf_ctl_max_phys) {
> - intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(cpu);
> - return;
> - }
> - scaling = DIV_ROUND_UP(cpu_khz, caps.nominal_perf);
> - } else if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(caps.guaranteed_perf, &caps)) {
> - pr_debug("CPU%d: Using CPPC guaranteed\n", cpu->cpu);
> -
> - /*
> - * If the CPPC guaranteed performance is valid, it can
> - * be assumed to correspond to max_freq.
> - */
> - if (caps.guaranteed_perf == perf_ctl_max) {
> - intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(cpu);
> - return;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB)) {
> + struct cppc_perf_caps caps;
> +
> + if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_caps(cpu, &caps)) {
> + if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(caps.nominal_perf, &caps)) {
> + pr_debug("CPU%d: Using CPPC nominal\n", cpu->cpu);
> +
> + /*
> + * If the CPPC nominal performance is valid, it
> + * can be assumed to correspond to cpu_khz.
> + */
> + if (caps.nominal_perf == perf_ctl_max_phys) {
> + intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(cpu);
> + return;
> + }
> + scaling = DIV_ROUND_UP(cpu_khz, caps.nominal_perf);
> + } else if (intel_pstate_cppc_perf_valid(caps.guaranteed_perf, &caps)) {
> + pr_debug("CPU%d: Using CPPC guaranteed\n", cpu->cpu);
> +
> + /*
> + * If the CPPC guaranteed performance is valid,
> + * it can be assumed to correspond to max_freq.
> + */
> + if (caps.guaranteed_perf == perf_ctl_max) {
> + intel_pstate_hybrid_hwp_perf_ctl_parity(cpu);
> + return;
> + }
> + scaling = DIV_ROUND_UP(max_freq, caps.guaranteed_perf);
> }
> - scaling = DIV_ROUND_UP(max_freq, caps.guaranteed_perf);
> }
> }
> +#endif
> /*
> * If using the CPPC data to compute the HWP-to-frequency scaling factor
> * doesn't work, use the HWP_CAP gauranteed perf for this purpose with
>
>
>
--
~Randy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: hybrid: Fix build with CONFIG_ACPI unset
2021-05-26 16:10 ` Randy Dunlap
@ 2021-05-26 17:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2021-05-26 17:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Randy Dunlap
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, Linux PM, LKML, Srinivas Pandruvada, Chen Yu
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 6:10 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On 5/26/21 8:01 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >
> > One of the previous commits introducing hybrid processor support to
> > intel_pstate broke build with CONFIG_ACPI unset.
> >
> > Fix that and while at it fix up empty stubs of two functions related
> > to ACPI CPPC.
> >
> > Fixes: eb3693f0521e ("cpufreq: intel_pstate: hybrid: CPU-specific scaling factor")
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> I still have this build error:
>
> ../drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c: In function ‘show_base_frequency’:
> ../drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c:950:10: error: implicit declaration of function ‘intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed’; did you mean ‘intel_pstate_get_epp’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> ratio = intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed(policy->cpu);
Well, I did too much in this patch, will send an update shortly.
> BTW: s/guranteed/guaranteed/g
Right.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-26 17:12 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-05-26 15:01 [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: hybrid: Fix build with CONFIG_ACPI unset Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-05-26 16:10 ` Randy Dunlap
2021-05-26 17:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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).