linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: qcom-cpufreq-hw: Add cpufreq qos for LMh

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:   Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:54:59 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@...soc.com>, mani@...nel.org,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
Cc:     agross@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, di.shen@...soc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: qcom-cpufreq-hw: Add cpufreq qos for LMh

Can someone familiar with the code please review this ?

On 15-09-22, 17:05, Xuewen Yan wrote:
> Before update thermal pressure, the max cpufreq should be limited.
> Add QOS control for Lmh throttle cpufreq.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@...soc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
> index d5ef3c66c762..deb1219435a5 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>  #include <linux/of_address.h>
>  #include <linux/of_platform.h>
>  #include <linux/pm_opp.h>
> +#include <linux/pm_qos.h>
>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>  #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>  #include <linux/units.h>
> @@ -56,6 +57,8 @@ struct qcom_cpufreq_data {
>  	struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>  
>  	bool per_core_dcvs;
> +
> +	struct freq_qos_request throttle_freq_req;
>  };
>  
>  static unsigned long cpu_hw_rate, xo_rate;
> @@ -318,6 +321,8 @@ static void qcom_lmh_dcvs_notify(struct qcom_cpufreq_data *data)
>  	} else {
>  		throttled_freq = freq_hz / HZ_PER_KHZ;
>  
> +		freq_qos_update_request(&data->throttle_freq_req, throttled_freq);
> +
>  		/* Update thermal pressure (the boost frequencies are accepted) */
>  		arch_update_thermal_pressure(policy->related_cpus, throttled_freq);
>  
> @@ -413,6 +418,14 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_lmh_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, int index)
>  	if (data->throttle_irq < 0)
>  		return data->throttle_irq;
>  
> +	ret = freq_qos_add_request(&policy->constraints,
> +				   &data->throttle_freq_req, FREQ_QOS_MAX,
> +				   FREQ_QOS_MAX_DEFAULT_VALUE);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to add freq constraint (%d)\n", ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
>  	data->cancel_throttle = false;
>  	data->policy = policy;
>  
> @@ -479,6 +492,7 @@ static void qcom_cpufreq_hw_lmh_exit(struct qcom_cpufreq_data *data)
>  	if (data->throttle_irq <= 0)
>  		return;
>  
> +	freq_qos_remove_request(&data->throttle_freq_req);
>  	free_irq(data->throttle_irq, data);
>  }

-- 
viresh