[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200730042423.4j22udejluis7blw@vireshk-mac-ubuntu>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 09:54:23 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
catalin.marinas@....com, sudeep.holla@....com, will@...nel.org,
linux@...linux.org.uk, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] arch_topology: disable frequency invariance for
CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER
On 22-07-20, 10:37, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ __weak bool arch_freq_counters_available(struct cpumask *cpus)
> }
> DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, freq_scale) = SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE;
>
> +#ifndef CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER
> void arch_set_freq_scale(struct cpumask *cpus, unsigned long cur_freq,
> unsigned long max_freq)
> {
> @@ -46,6 +47,7 @@ void arch_set_freq_scale(struct cpumask *cpus, unsigned long cur_freq,
> for_each_cpu(i, cpus)
> per_cpu(freq_scale, i) = scale;
> }
> +#endif
I don't really like this change, the ifdef hackery is disgusting and
then we are putting that in a completely different part of the kernel.
There are at least these two ways of solving this, maybe more:
- Fix the bl switcher driver and add the complexity in it (which you
tried to do earlier).
- Add a cpufreq flag to skip arch-set-freq-scale call.
Rafael ?
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists