[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c2bc6447-d8de-4f0f-d735-df377ab40f1c@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 16:58:27 +0100
From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>, rafael@...nel.org,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: treding@...dia.com, bbasu@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [Patch] driver: cpufreq: use refclk delta based loop instead of
udelay
On 01/09/2023 16:20, Sumit Gupta wrote:
> Use reference clock count based loop instead of "udelay()" for
> sampling of counters to improve the accuracy of re-generated CPU
> frequency. "udelay()" internally calls "WFE" which stops the
> counters and results in bigger delta between the last set freq
> and the re-generated value from counters. The counter sampling
> window used in loop is the minimum number of reference clock
> cycles which is known to give a stable value of CPU frequency.
> The change also helps to reduce the sampling window from "500us"
> to "<50us".
>
> Suggested-by: Antti Miettinen <amiettinen@...dia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
Please can you correct the subject and drop the 'driver:'.
Jon
--
nvpublic
Powered by blists - more mailing lists