linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: drivers: Enable frequency invariance in qcom-cpufreq-hw

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: <20190809103704.fatayhzso2b62fmx@queper01-lin>
Date:   Fri, 9 Aug 2019 11:37:06 +0100
From:   Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
To:     Douglas Raillard <douglas.raillard@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, agross@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: drivers: Enable frequency invariance in
 qcom-cpufreq-hw

On Friday 09 Aug 2019 at 11:16:12 (+0100), Douglas Raillard wrote:
> Hi Quentin,
> 
> On 8/8/19 6:32 PM, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > Hi Douglas,
> > 
> > On Thursday 08 Aug 2019 at 14:18:57 (+0100), Douglas RAILLARD wrote:
> > > Add calls to arch_set_freq_scale() in qcom-cpufreq-hw driver to enable
> > > frequency invariance.
> > 
> > Is there a patch 2/2 ?
> 
> That slipped through when format-patch-ing unrelated commits, there is no 2nd patch.
> 
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Douglas RAILLARD <douglas.raillard@....com>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 10 +++++++++-
> > >   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
> > > index 4b0b50403901..3bd3b8b268d9 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
> > > @@ -34,9 +34,12 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_target_index(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> > >   					unsigned int index)
> > >   {
> > >   	void __iomem *perf_state_reg = policy->driver_data;
> > > +	unsigned long freq = policy->freq_table[index].frequency;
> > >   	writel_relaxed(index, perf_state_reg);
> > > +	arch_set_freq_scale(policy->related_cpus, freq,
> > > +			    policy->cpuinfo.max_freq);
> > >   	return 0;
> > >   }
> > > @@ -63,6 +66,7 @@ static unsigned int qcom_cpufreq_hw_fast_switch(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> > >   {
> > >   	void __iomem *perf_state_reg = policy->driver_data;
> > >   	int index;
> > > +	unsigned long freq;
> > >   	index = policy->cached_resolved_idx;
> > >   	if (index < 0)
> > > @@ -70,7 +74,11 @@ static unsigned int qcom_cpufreq_hw_fast_switch(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> > >   	writel_relaxed(index, perf_state_reg);
> > > -	return policy->freq_table[index].frequency;
> > > +	freq = policy->freq_table[index].frequency;
> > > +	arch_set_freq_scale(policy->related_cpus, freq,
> > > +			    policy->cpuinfo.max_freq);
> > > +
> > > +	return freq;
> > >   }
> > >   static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(struct device *cpu_dev,
> > > -- 
> > > 2.22.0
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Quentin
> > 
> 
> Thanks,
> Douglas

Actually, one nit, the $subject should probably be formatted as:

  cpufreq: qcom-hw: invoke frequency-invariance setter function

for consistency with other patches in this area.

Thanks,
Quentin