linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] PM: domains: Add a ->dev_get_performance

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]

Date:   Tue, 7 Sep 2021 11:10:12 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
        Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] PM: domains: Add a ->dev_get_performance_state()
 callback to genpd

07.09.2021 06:40, Viresh Kumar пишет:
> On 06-09-21, 17:35, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> Viresh, are you okay with going back to the variant with the
>> dev_pm_opp_sync() helper?
> 
> I have missed a lot of stuff in between and wasn't following this
> carefully as I thought my half was resolved :)
> 
> Can you describe what to propose to do again ? From what I remember,
> doing this one time from probe() is okay, doing it from
> suspend/resume, not so much.

Hmm.. actually, it's not a problem to set up the performance state from
probe() now with that recent change that was made to the PD core. [1]

[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=3c5a272202c28c1f9309566f206ba40787246149

And then we indeed don't need neither the dev_get_performance_state()
callback, nor the dev_pm_opp_sync() helper.

The devm_tegra_core_dev_init_opp_table() already supports performance
state syncing, so I will just need to call it after the RPM setup made
by consumer driver, allowing PD core to set the rpm_pstate. I already
gave it a quick test and it works perfectly.

Ulf, are you okay with abandoning the dev_get_performance_state()
callback? We don't need it anymore.