linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: mediatek: Register an Energy Model

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190206101316.fr7z4ffr4ck4l4aj@queper01-lin>
Date:   Wed, 6 Feb 2019 10:13:18 +0000
From:   Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
To:     Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        Taniya Das <tdas@...eaurora.org>, CK Hu <ck.hu@...iatek.com>,
        Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>,
        Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: mediatek: Register an Energy Model

Hi Matthias,

On Tuesday 05 Feb 2019 at 09:52:25 (-0800), Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> Try and register an Energy Model from mediatek-cpufreq to allow
> interested subsystems like the task scheduler to use the provided
> information.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> index eb8920d398181..e6168ee582783 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> @@ -460,6 +460,8 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  		return ret;
>  	}
>  
> +	dev_pm_opp_of_register_em(policy->cpus);

I'm not familiar with the mediatek-cpufreq driver so bear with me, but
the code sets policy->cpus just below here. Is there any particular
reason for not using that in PM_EM ?

>  	cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, &info->cpus);
>  	policy->freq_table = freq_table;
>  	policy->driver_data = info;
> -- 
> 2.20.1.611.gfbb209baf1-goog
> 

Thanks,
Quentin