- 28 4月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The name of the prev_cpu_wall field in struct cpu_dbs_info is confusing, because it doesn't represent wall time, but the previous update time as returned by get_cpu_idle_time() (that may be the current value of jiffies_64 in some cases, for example). Moreover, the names of some related variables in dbs_update() take that confusion further. Rename all of those things to make their names reflect the purpose more accurately. While at it, drop unnecessary parens from one of the updated expressions. No functional changes. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NChen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
-
- 25 4月, 2016 2 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The way cpufreq_governor_start() initializes j_cdbs->prev_load is questionable. First off, j_cdbs->prev_cpu_wall used as a denominator in the computation may be zero. The case this happens is when get_cpu_idle_time_us() returns -1 and get_cpu_idle_time_jiffy() used to return that number is called exactly at the jiffies_64 wrap time. It is rather hard to trigger that error, but it is not impossible and it will just crash the kernel then. Second, j_cdbs->prev_load is computed as the average load during the entire time since the system started and it may not reflect the load in the previous sampling period (as it is expected to). That doesn't play well with the way dbs_update() uses that value. Namely, if the update time delta (wall_time) happens do be greater than twice the sampling rate on the first invocation of it, the initial value of j_cdbs->prev_load (which may be completely off) will be returned to the caller as the current load (unless it is equal to zero and unless another CPU sharing the same policy object has a greater load value). For this reason, notice that the prev_load field of struct cpu_dbs_info is only used by dbs_update() and only in that one place, so if cpufreq_governor_start() is modified to always initialize it to 0, it will make dbs_update() always compute the actual load first time it checks the update time delta against the doubled sampling rate (after initialization) and there won't be any side effects of it. Consequently, modify cpufreq_governor_start() as described. Fixes: 18b46abd (cpufreq: governor: Be friendly towards latency-sensitive bursty workloads) Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Revert commit 0df35026 (cpufreq: governor: Fix negative idle_time when configured with CONFIG_HZ_PERIODIC) that introduced a regression by causing the ondemand cpufreq governor to misbehave for CONFIG_TICK_CPU_ACCOUNTING unset (the frequency goes up to the max at one point and stays there indefinitely). The revert takes subsequent modifications of the code in question into account. Fixes: 0df35026 (cpufreq: governor: Fix negative idle_time when configured with CONFIG_HZ_PERIODIC) Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=115261Reported-and-tested-by: NTimo Valtoaho <timo.valtoaho@gmail.com> Cc: 4.5+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 4.5+ Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
- 02 4月, 2016 3 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Move abstract code related to struct gov_attr_set to a separate (new) file so it can be shared with (future) goverernors that won't share more code with "ondemand" and "conservative". No intentional functional changes. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
In addition to fields representing governor tunables, struct dbs_data contains some fields needed for the management of objects of that type. As it turns out, that part of struct dbs_data may be shared with (future) governors that won't use the common code used by "ondemand" and "conservative", so move it to a separate struct type and modify the code using struct dbs_data to follow. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Replace the single helper for adding and removing cpufreq utilization update hooks, cpufreq_set_update_util_data(), with a pair of helpers, cpufreq_add_update_util_hook() and cpufreq_remove_update_util_hook(), and modify the users of cpufreq_set_update_util_data() accordingly. With the new helpers, the code using them doesn't need to worry about the internals of struct update_util_data and in particular it doesn't need to worry about populating the func field in it properly upfront. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
-
- 23 3月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Modify dbs_irq_work() to always schedule the process-context work on the current CPU which also ran the dbs_update_util_handler() that the irq_work being handled came from. This causes the entire frequency update handling (involving the "ondemand" or "conservative" governors) to be carried out by the CPU whose frequency is to be updated and reduces the overall amount of inter-CPU noise related to cpufreq. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 11 3月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Create cpufreq.c under kernel/sched/ and move the cpufreq code related to the scheduler to that file and to sched.h. Redefine cpufreq_update_util() as a static inline function to avoid function calls at its call sites in the scheduler code (as suggested by Peter Zijlstra). Also move the definition of struct update_util_data and declaration of cpufreq_set_update_util_data() from include/linux/cpufreq.h to include/linux/sched.h. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
-
- 09 3月, 2016 32 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Use the observation that cpufreq_update_util() is only called by the scheduler with rq->lock held, so the callers of cpufreq_set_update_util_data() can use synchronize_sched() instead of synchronize_rcu() to wait for cpufreq_update_util() to complete. Moreover, if they are updated to do that, rcu_read_(un)lock() calls in cpufreq_update_util() might be replaced with rcu_read_(un)lock_sched(), respectively, but those aren't really necessary, because the scheduler calls that function from RCU-sched read-side critical sections already. In addition to that, if cpufreq_set_update_util_data() checks the func field in the struct update_util_data before setting the per-CPU pointer to it, the data->func check may be dropped from cpufreq_update_util() as well. Make the above changes to reduce the overhead from cpufreq_update_util() in the scheduler paths invoking it and to make the cleanup after removing its callbacks less heavy-weight somewhat. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
The show() and store() routines in the cpufreq-governor core don't need to check if the struct governor_attr they want to use really provides the callbacks they need as expected (if that's not the case, it means a bug in the code anyway), so change them to avoid doing that. Also change the error value to -EBUSY, if the governor is getting removed and we aren't allowed to store any more changes. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
There is a scenario that may lead to undesired results in dbs_update_util_handler(). Namely, if two CPUs sharing a policy enter the funtion at the same time, pass the sample delay check and then one of them is stalled until dbs_work_handler() (queued up by the other CPU) clears the work counter, it may update the work counter and queue up another work item prematurely. To prevent that from happening, use the observation that the CPU queuing up a work item in dbs_update_util_handler() updates the last sample time. This means that if another CPU was stalling after passing the sample delay check and now successfully updated the work counter as a result of the race described above, it will see the new value of the last sample time which is different from what it used in the sample delay check before. If that happens, the sample delay check passed previously is not valid any more, so the CPU should not continue. Fixes: f17cbb53783c (cpufreq: governor: Avoid atomic operations in hot paths) Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The gov_set_update_util() routine is only used internally by the common governor code and it doesn't need to be exported, so make it static. No functional changes. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Since cpufreq_governor_dbs() is now always called with policy->rwsem held, it cannot be executed twice in parallel for the same policy. Thus it is not necessary to hold dbs_data_mutex around the invocations of cpufreq_governor_start/stop/limits() from it as those functions never modify any data that can be shared between different policies. However, cpufreq_governor_dbs() may be executed twice in parallal for different policies using the same gov->gdbs_data object and dbs_data_mutex is still necessary to protect that object against concurrent updates. For this reason, narrow down the dbs_data_mutex locking to cpufreq_governor_init/exit() where it is needed and rename the mutex to gov_dbs_data_mutex to reflect its purpose. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
That mutex is only used by cpufreq_governor_dbs() and it doesn't need to be exported to modules, so make it static and drop the export incantation. No functional changes. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
After previous changes there is only one piece of code in the ondemand governor making references to per-CPU data structures, but it can be easily modified to avoid doing that, so modify it accordingly and move the definition of per-CPU data used by the ondemand and conservative governors to the common code. Next, change that code to access the per-CPU data structures directly rather than via a governor callback. This causes the ->get_cpu_cdbs governor callback to become unnecessary, so drop it along with the macro and function definitions related to it. Finally, drop the definitions of struct od_cpu_dbs_info_s and struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s that aren't necessary any more. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Some fields in struct od_cpu_dbs_info_s and struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s are only used for a limited set of CPUs. Namely, if a policy is shared between multiple CPUs, those fields will only be used for one of them (policy->cpu). This means that they really are per-policy rather than per-CPU and holding room for them in per-CPU data structures is generally wasteful. Also moving those fields into per-policy data structures will allow some significant simplifications to be made going forward. For this reason, introduce struct cs_policy_dbs_info and struct od_policy_dbs_info to hold those fields. Define each of the new structures as an extension of struct policy_dbs_info (such that struct policy_dbs_info is embedded in each of them) and introduce new ->alloc and ->free governor callbacks to allocate and free those structures, respectively, such that ->alloc() will return a pointer to the struct policy_dbs_info embedded in the allocated data structure and ->free() will take that pointer as its argument. With that, modify the code accessing the data fields in question in per-CPU data objects to look for them in the new structures via the struct policy_dbs_info pointer available to it and drop them from struct od_cpu_dbs_info_s and struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The ->store() callbacks of some tunable sysfs attributes of the ondemand and conservative governors trigger immediate updates of the CPU load information for all CPUs "governed" by the given dbs_data by walking the cpu_dbs_info structures for all online CPUs in the system and updating them. This is questionable for two reasons. First, it may lead to a lot of extra overhead on a system with many CPUs if the given dbs_data is only associated with a few of them. Second, if governor tunables are per-policy, the CPUs associated with the other sets of governor tunables should not be updated. To address this issue, use the observation that in all of the places in question the update operation may be carried out in the same way (because all of the tunables involved are now located in struct dbs_data and readily available to the common code) and make the code in those places invoke the same (new) helper function that will carry out the update correctly. That new function always checks the ignore_nice_load tunable value and updates the CPUs' prev_cpu_nice data fields if that's set, which wasn't done by the original code in store_io_is_busy(), but it should have been done in there too. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
To avoid having to check the governor type explicitly in the common code in order to initialize data structures specific to the governor type properly, add a ->start callback to struct dbs_governor and use it to initialize those data structures for the ondemand and conservative governors. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The io_is_busy governor tunable is only used by the ondemand governor and is located in the ondemand-specific data structure, but it is looked at by the common governor code that has to do ugly things to get to that value, so move it to struct dbs_data and modify ondemand accordingly. Since the conservative governor never touches that field, it will be always 0 for that governor and it won't have any effect on the results of computations in that case. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
It is possible for a dbs_data object to be updated after its usage counter has become 0. That may happen if governor_store() runs (via a govenor tunable sysfs attribute write) in parallel with cpufreq_governor_exit() called for the last cpufreq policy associated with the dbs_data in question. In that case, if governor_store() acquires dbs_data->mutex right after cpufreq_governor_exit() has released it, the ->store() callback invoked by it may operate on dbs_data with no users. Although sysfs will cause the kobject_put() in cpufreq_governor_exit() to block until governor_store() has returned, that situation may lead to some unexpected results, depending on the implementation of the ->store callback, and therefore it should be avoided. To that end, modify governor_store() to check the dbs_data's usage count before invoking the ->store() callback and return an error if it is 0 at that point. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Do not convert microseconds to jiffies and the other way around in governor computations related to the sampling rate and sample delay and drop delay_for_sampling_rate() which isn't of any use then. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The rate_mult field in struct od_cpu_dbs_info_s is used by the code shared with the conservative governor and to access it that code has to do an ugly governor type check. However, first of all it is ever only used for policy->cpu, so it is per-policy rather than per-CPU and second, it is initialized to 1 by cpufreq_governor_start(), so if the conservative governor never modifies it, it will have no effect on the results of any computations. For these reasons, move rate_mult to struct policy_dbs_info (as a common field). Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
If store_sampling_rate() updates the sample delay when the ondemand governor is in the middle of its high/low dance (OD_SUB_SAMPLE sample type is set), the governor will still do the bottom half of the previous sample which may take too much time. To prevent that from happening, change store_sampling_rate() to always reset the sample delay to 0 which also is consistent with the new behavior of cpufreq_governor_limits(). Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The way the ->gov_check_cpu governor callback is used by the ondemand and conservative governors is not really straightforward. Namely, the governor calls dbs_check_cpu() that updates the load information for the policy and the invokes ->gov_check_cpu() for the governor. To get rid of that entanglement, notice that cpufreq_governor_limits() doesn't need to call dbs_check_cpu() directly. Instead, it can simply reset the sample delay to 0 which will cause a sample to be taken immediately. The result of that is practically equivalent to calling dbs_check_cpu() except that it will trigger a full update of governor internal state and not just the ->gov_check_cpu() part. Following that observation, make cpufreq_governor_limits() reset the sample delay and turn dbs_check_cpu() into a function that will simply evaluate the load and return the result called dbs_update(). That function can now be called by governors from the routines that previously were pointed to by ->gov_check_cpu and those routines can be called directly by each governor instead of dbs_check_cpu(). This way ->gov_check_cpu becomes unnecessary, so drop it. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Clean up some load-related computations in dbs_check_cpu() and cpufreq_governor_start() to get rid of unnecessary operations and type casts and make the code easier to read. No functional changes. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The contribution of the CPU nice time to the idle time in dbs_check_cpu() is computed in a bogus way, as the code may subtract current and previous nice values for different CPUs. That doesn't matter for cases when cpufreq policies are not shared, but may lead to problems otherwise. Fix the computation and simplify it to avoid taking unnecessary steps. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Rework the handling of work items by dbs_update_util_handler() and dbs_work_handler() so the former (which is executed in scheduler paths) only uses atomic operations when absolutely necessary. That is, when the policy is shared and dbs_update_util_handler() has already decided that this is the time to queue up a work item. In particular, this avoids the atomic ops entirely on platforms where policy objects are never shared. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The atomic work counter incrementation in gov_cancel_work() is not necessary any more, because work items won't be queued up after gov_clear_update_util() anyway, so drop it along with the comment about how it may be missed by the gov_clear_update_util(). Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
As it turns out, irq_work_queue_on() will crash if invoked on non-SMP ARM platforms, but in fact it is not necessary to use that function in the cpufreq governor code (as it doesn't matter to that code which CPU will handle the irq_work), so change it to always use irq_work_queue(). Fixes: 8fb47ff100af (cpufreq: governor: Replace timers with utilization update callbacks) Reported-and-tested-by: NGuenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> Reported-and-tested-by: NTony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
The ondemand governor already updates sample_delay_ns immediately on updates to the sampling rate, but conservative doesn't do that. It was left out earlier as the code was really too complex to get that done easily. Things are sorted out very well now, however, and the conservative governor can be modified to follow ondemand in that respect. Moreover, since the code needed to implement that in the conservative governor would be identical to the corresponding ondemand governor's code, make that code common and change both governors to use it. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Tested-by: NJuri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> Tested-by: NShilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [ rjw: Changelog ] Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
The cpufreq core now guarantees that policy->rwsem won't be dropped while running the ->governor callback for the CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT event and will be held acquired until the complete sequence of governor state changes has finished. This allows governor state machine checks to be dropped from multiple functions in cpufreq_governor.c. This also means that policy_dbs->policy can be initialized upfront, so the entire initialization of struct policy_dbs can be carried out in one place. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Tested-by: NJuri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> Tested-by: NShilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [ rjw: Changelog ] Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
The dbs_data_mutex lock is currently used in two places. First, cpufreq_governor_dbs() uses it to guarantee mutual exclusion between invocations of governor operations from the core. Second, it is used by ondemand governor's update_sampling_rate() to ensure the stability of data structures walked by it. The second usage is quite problematic, because update_sampling_rate() is called from a governor sysfs attribute's ->store callback and that leads to a deadlock scenario involving cpufreq_governor_exit() which runs under dbs_data_mutex. Thus it is better to rework the code so update_sampling_rate() doesn't need to acquire dbs_data_mutex. To that end, rework update_sampling_rate() to walk a list of policy_dbs objects supported by the dbs_data one it has been called for (instead of walking cpu_dbs_info object for all CPUs). The list manipulation is protected with dbs_data->mutex which also is held around the execution of update_sampling_rate(), it is not necessary to hold dbs_data_mutex in that function any more. Reported-by: NJuri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> Reported-by: NShilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> [ rjw: Subject & changelog ] Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
The ondemand and conservative governors use the global-attr or freq-attr structures to represent sysfs attributes corresponding to their tunables (which of them is actually used depends on whether or not different policy objects can use the same governor with different tunables at the same time and, consequently, on where those attributes are located in sysfs). Unfortunately, in the freq-attr case, the standard cpufreq show/store sysfs attribute callbacks are applied to the governor tunable attributes and they always acquire the policy->rwsem lock before carrying out the operation. That may lead to an ABBA deadlock if governor tunable attributes are removed under policy->rwsem while one of them is being accessed concurrently (if sysfs attributes removal wins the race, it will wait for the access to complete with policy->rwsem held while the attribute callback will block on policy->rwsem indefinitely). We attempted to address this issue by dropping policy->rwsem around governor tunable attributes removal (that is, around invocations of the ->governor callback with the event arg equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT) in cpufreq_set_policy(), but that opened up race conditions that had not been possible with policy->rwsem held all the time. Therefore policy->rwsem cannot be dropped in cpufreq_set_policy() at any point, but the deadlock situation described above must be avoided too. To that end, use the observation that in principle governor tunables may be represented by the same data type regardless of whether the governor is system-wide or per-policy and introduce a new structure, struct governor_attr, for representing them and new corresponding macros for creating show/store sysfs callbacks for them. Also make their parent kobject use a new kobject type whose default show/store callbacks are not related to the standard core cpufreq ones in any way (and they don't acquire policy->rwsem in particular). Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Tested-by: NJuri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> Tested-by: NShilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [ rjw: Subject & changelog + rebase ] Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
There are a few common tunables shared between the ondemand and conservative governors. Move them to struct dbs_data to simplify code. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Tested-by: NJuri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> Tested-by: NShilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [ rjw: Changelog ] Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
It is silly to jump around "return 0", so don't do that. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The skip_work field in struct policy_dbs_info technically is a counter, so give it a new name to reflect that. No functional changes. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Make the initialization of struct cpu_dbs_info objects in alloc_policy_dbs_info() and the code that cleans them up in free_policy_dbs_info() more symmetrical. In particular, set/clear the update_util.func field in those functions along with the policy_dbs field. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The struct policy_dbs_info objects representing per-policy governor data are not accessible directly from the corresponding policy objects. To access them, one has to get a pointer to the struct cpu_dbs_info of policy->cpu and use the policy_dbs field of that which isn't really straightforward. To address that rearrange the governor data structures so the governor_data pointer in struct cpufreq_policy will point to struct policy_dbs_info (instead of struct dbs_data) and that will contain a pointer to struct dbs_data. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Use the observation that cpufreq_governor_limits() doesn't have to get to the policy object it wants to manipulate by walking the reference chain cdbs->policy_dbs->policy, as the final pointer is actually equal to its argument, and make it access the policy object directy via its argument. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Since policy->cpu is always passed as the second argument to dbs_check_cpu(), it is not really necessary to pass it, because the function can obtain that value via its first argument just fine. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-