linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/28] x86: platform: iosf_mbi: Call cpu_latency_qos_*() instead of pm_qos

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20200212101420.GQ10400@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 12 Feb 2020 12:14:20 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
        David Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>,
        x86 Maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/28] x86: platform: iosf_mbi: Call cpu_latency_qos_*()
 instead of pm_qos_*()

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 12:10:00AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> 
> Call cpu_latency_qos_add/update/remove_request() instead of
> pm_qos_add/update/remove_request(), respectively, because the
> latter are going to be dropped.
> 
> No intentional functional impact.

Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>

> 
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/platform/intel/iosf_mbi.c | 13 ++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel/iosf_mbi.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel/iosf_mbi.c
> index 9e2444500428..526f70f27c1c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel/iosf_mbi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel/iosf_mbi.c
> @@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ static void iosf_mbi_reset_semaphore(void)
>  			    iosf_mbi_sem_address, 0, PUNIT_SEMAPHORE_BIT))
>  		dev_err(&mbi_pdev->dev, "Error P-Unit semaphore reset failed\n");
>  
> -	pm_qos_update_request(&iosf_mbi_pm_qos, PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
> +	cpu_latency_qos_update_request(&iosf_mbi_pm_qos, PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
>  
>  	blocking_notifier_call_chain(&iosf_mbi_pmic_bus_access_notifier,
>  				     MBI_PMIC_BUS_ACCESS_END, NULL);
> @@ -301,8 +301,8 @@ static void iosf_mbi_reset_semaphore(void)
>   * 4) When CPU cores enter C6 or C7 the P-Unit needs to talk to the PMIC
>   *    if this happens while the kernel itself is accessing the PMIC I2C bus
>   *    the SoC hangs.
> - *    As the third step we call pm_qos_update_request() to disallow the CPU
> - *    to enter C6 or C7.
> + *    As the third step we call cpu_latency_qos_update_request() to disallow the
> + *    CPU to enter C6 or C7.
>   *
>   * 5) The P-Unit has a PMIC bus semaphore which we can request to stop
>   *    autonomous P-Unit tasks from accessing the PMIC I2C bus while we hold it.
> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ int iosf_mbi_block_punit_i2c_access(void)
>  	 * requires the P-Unit to talk to the PMIC and if this happens while
>  	 * we're holding the semaphore, the SoC hangs.
>  	 */
> -	pm_qos_update_request(&iosf_mbi_pm_qos, 0);
> +	cpu_latency_qos_update_request(&iosf_mbi_pm_qos, 0);
>  
>  	/* host driver writes to side band semaphore register */
>  	ret = iosf_mbi_write(BT_MBI_UNIT_PMC, MBI_REG_WRITE,
> @@ -547,8 +547,7 @@ static int __init iosf_mbi_init(void)
>  {
>  	iosf_debugfs_init();
>  
> -	pm_qos_add_request(&iosf_mbi_pm_qos, PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY,
> -			   PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
> +	cpu_latency_qos_add_request(&iosf_mbi_pm_qos, PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
>  
>  	return pci_register_driver(&iosf_mbi_pci_driver);
>  }
> @@ -561,7 +560,7 @@ static void __exit iosf_mbi_exit(void)
>  	pci_dev_put(mbi_pdev);
>  	mbi_pdev = NULL;
>  
> -	pm_qos_remove_request(&iosf_mbi_pm_qos);
> +	cpu_latency_qos_remove_request(&iosf_mbi_pm_qos);
>  }
>  
>  module_init(iosf_mbi_init);
> -- 
> 2.16.4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko