[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b1210cbf-22c8-48f1-ad50-d81395abc8f3@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 13:20:09 -0600
From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
To: Naresh Solanki <naresh.solanki@...ements.com>
Cc: Huang Rui <ray.huang@....com>, "Gautham R. Shenoy"
<gautham.shenoy@....com>, Perry Yuan <perry.yuan@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Refactor max frequency calculation
On 12/18/2024 13:00, Naresh Solanki wrote:
> Refactor to calculate max-freq more accurately.
Can you add some more detail about what you're finding?
What was it before, what is it now, why is it more accurate?
>
> Signed-off-by: Naresh Solanki <naresh.solanki@...ements.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> index d7630bab2516..78a2cbd14952 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> @@ -892,7 +892,7 @@ static int amd_pstate_init_freq(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
> u64 numerator;
> u32 nominal_perf, nominal_freq;
> u32 lowest_nonlinear_perf, lowest_nonlinear_freq;
> - u32 boost_ratio, lowest_nonlinear_ratio;
> + u32 lowest_nonlinear_ratio;
> struct cppc_perf_caps cppc_perf;
>
> ret = cppc_get_perf_caps(cpudata->cpu, &cppc_perf);
> @@ -914,8 +914,7 @@ static int amd_pstate_init_freq(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
> ret = amd_get_boost_ratio_numerator(cpudata->cpu, &numerator);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> - boost_ratio = div_u64(numerator << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT, nominal_perf);
> - max_freq = (nominal_freq * boost_ratio >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT) * 1000;
> + max_freq = div_u64(numerator * nominal_freq * 1000, nominal_perf);
This doesn't apply currently, because of some changes in the
superm1.git/linux-next branch; specifically:
https://git.kernel.org/superm1/c/68cb0e77b6439
I haven't sent this out to linux-pm yet so it could be in linux-next,
but will be doing that soon. So can you please rebase on that branch if
this change still makes sense?
>
> lowest_nonlinear_perf = READ_ONCE(cpudata->lowest_nonlinear_perf);
> lowest_nonlinear_ratio = div_u64(lowest_nonlinear_perf << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists