linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Add support for marking certain frequencies as boost

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: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 11:05:54 +0530
From: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
To: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>
CC: <sudeep.holla@....com>, <cristian.marussi@....com>, <rafael@...nel.org>,
        <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, <lukasz.luba@....com>, <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <quic_mdtipton@...cinc.com>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <nm@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Add support for marking
 certain frequencies as boost

On Mar 08, 2024 at 16:14:09 +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> All opps above the sustained level/frequency are treated as boost, so mark

I know that we use the terms boost and turbo interchangeably however I
would suggest to avoid confusion that we say "treated as turbo" just
because the variable is called turbo.

> them accordingly.
> 
> Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c | 8 +++++++-
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
> index 8e832d1ad825..64d9a90bf443 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
> @@ -857,7 +857,7 @@ static int scmi_dvfs_device_opps_add(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph,
>  				     struct device *dev, u32 domain)
>  {
>  	int idx, ret;
> -	unsigned long freq;
> +	unsigned long freq, sustained_freq;
>  	struct dev_pm_opp_data data = {};
>  	struct perf_dom_info *dom;
>  
> @@ -865,12 +865,18 @@ static int scmi_dvfs_device_opps_add(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph,
>  	if (IS_ERR(dom))
>  		return PTR_ERR(dom);
>  
> +	sustained_freq = dom->sustained_freq_khz * 1000UL;
> +
>  	for (idx = 0; idx < dom->opp_count; idx++) {
>  		if (!dom->level_indexing_mode)
>  			freq = dom->opp[idx].perf * dom->mult_factor;
>  		else
>  			freq = dom->opp[idx].indicative_freq * dom->mult_factor;
>  
> +		/* All opps above the sustained level/frequency are treated as boost */

Same here, would be better to say "turbo" than boost.

> +		if (freq > sustained_freq)
> +			data.turbo = true;

It's simple enough that we can write it as
data.turbo = (freq > sustained_freq_khz*1000) ? true : false;

We can avoid an additional variable and all the other code changes.


-- 
Best regards,
Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>