[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230206041003.4dhwunhq6yemvbur@vireshk-i7>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 09:40:03 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>, swboyd@...omium.org,
mka@...omium.org, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Fix cpufreq_driver->get() for non-LMH
systems
On 02-02-23, 14:00, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> On a sc7180-based Chromebook, when I go to
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq I can see:
>
> cpuinfo_cur_freq:2995200
> cpuinfo_max_freq:1804800
> scaling_available_frequencies:300000 576000 ... 1708800 1804800
> scaling_cur_freq:1804800
> scaling_max_freq:1804800
>
> As you can see the `cpuinfo_cur_freq` is bogus. It turns out that this
> bogus info started showing up as of commit 205f5e984d30 ("cpufreq:
> qcom-hw: Fix the frequency returned by cpufreq_driver->get()"). That
> commit seems to assume that everyone is on the LMH bandwagon, but
> sc7180 isn't.
>
> Let's go back to the old code in the case where LMH isn't used.
>
> Fixes: 205f5e984d30 ("cpufreq: qcom-hw: Fix the frequency returned by cpufreq_driver->get()")
This is incorrect.
Fixes: c72cf0cb1d77 ("cpufreq: qcom-hw: Fix the frequency returned by cpufreq_driver->get()")
Applied. Thanks.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists