Add a flag for cpufreq drivers to tell cpufreq core to auto-register
themselves as a thermal cooling device.
There series converts over all the drivers except arm_big_little.c.
Tested on SDM845 with the qcom-cpufreq-hw driver. Only compile-tested the
others.
Things needing fixing (but not a blocker for the series):
- Look at how to detect that we're not in IKS mode in arm_big_little's
.ready callback.
Changes since v4:
- Added IS_ENABLED guards in cpufreq.c
- Changed flag name to CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV
- Collected various review tags
Changes since v3:
- Got rid of wrapper function to register/unregister cooling devices.
Directly call the function in cpufreq.c
Changes since v2:
- Get rid of #ifdef'ery and let the pointer exist in all cases
- Get rid of (!CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL) dependency in all cpufreq drivers'
Kconfig
Changes since v1:
- Fix compilation failures with allmodconfig
- Get rid of #ifdef in cpufreq.c
- Removed miscellaneous patches and sent them separately
- Merged patches 1 and 2 from v1
Amit Kucheria (9):
thermal: cpu_cooling: Require thermal core to be compiled in
cpufreq: Auto-register the driver as a thermal cooling device if asked
cpufreq: qcom-hw: Register as a cpufreq cooling device
cpufreq: imx6q: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
cpufreq: cpufreq-dt: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
cpufreq: mediatek: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
cpufreq: qoriq: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
cpufreq: scmi: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
cpufreq: scpi: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig | 3 ---
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 5 -----
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 14 ++------------
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c | 24 ++----------------------
drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 3 ++-
drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c | 15 ++-------------
drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
drivers/thermal/Kconfig | 1 +
include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
12 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)
--
2.17.1
All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
private data structure.
Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include <linux/cpu.h>
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
+#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>
#include <linux/device.h>
#include <linux/init.h>
@@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
+ if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
+ policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
+#endif
+
pr_debug("initialization complete\n");
return 0;
@@ -1405,6 +1411,13 @@ static int cpufreq_offline(unsigned int cpu)
goto unlock;
}
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
+ if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV) {
+ cpufreq_cooling_unregister(policy->cdev);
+ policy->cdev = NULL;
+ }
+#endif
+
if (cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu)
cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu(policy);
diff --git a/include/linux/cpufreq.h b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
index bd7fbd6a4478..6078eb07a7e4 100644
--- a/include/linux/cpufreq.h
+++ b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
@@ -151,6 +151,9 @@ struct cpufreq_policy {
/* For cpufreq driver's internal use */
void *driver_data;
+
+ /* Pointer to the cooling device if used for thermal mitigation */
+ struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
};
/* Only for ACPI */
@@ -386,6 +389,12 @@ struct cpufreq_driver {
*/
#define CPUFREQ_NO_AUTO_DYNAMIC_SWITCHING BIT(6)
+/*
+ * Set by drivers that want the core to automatically register the cpufreq
+ * driver as a thermal cooling device.
+ */
+#define CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV BIT(7)
+
int cpufreq_register_driver(struct cpufreq_driver *driver_data);
int cpufreq_unregister_driver(struct cpufreq_driver *driver_data);
--
2.17.1
Add the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV flag to allow the cpufreq core to
auto-register the driver as a cooling device.
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
index d83939a1b3d4..c88b51304d89 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
@@ -231,7 +231,8 @@ static struct freq_attr *qcom_cpufreq_hw_attr[] = {
static struct cpufreq_driver cpufreq_qcom_hw_driver = {
.flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK |
- CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY,
+ CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY |
+ CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.target_index = qcom_cpufreq_hw_target_index,
.get = qcom_cpufreq_hw_get,
--
2.17.1
The CPU cooling driver (cpu_cooling.c) allows the platform's cpufreq
driver to register as a cooling device and cool down the platform by
throttling the CPU frequency. In order to be able to auto-register a
cpufreq driver as a cooling device from the cpufreq core, we need access
to code inside cpu_cooling.c which, in turn, accesses code inside
thermal core.
CPU_FREQ is a bool while THERMAL is tristate. In some configurations
(e.g. allmodconfig), CONFIG_THERMAL ends up as a module while
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ is compiled in. This leads to following error:
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.o: In function `cpufreq_offline':
cpufreq.c:(.text+0x407c): undefined reference to `cpufreq_cooling_unregister'
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.o: In function `cpufreq_online':
cpufreq.c:(.text+0x70c0): undefined reference to `of_cpufreq_cooling_register'
Given that platforms using CPU_THERMAL usually want it compiled-in so it
is available early in boot, make CPU_THERMAL depend on THERMAL being
compiled-in instead of allowing it to be a module.
As a result of this change, get rid of the ugly (!CPU_THERMAL ||
THERMAL) dependency in all cpufreq drivers using CPU_THERMAL.
Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig | 3 ---
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 5 -----
drivers/thermal/Kconfig | 1 +
3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
index 608af20a3494..b22e6bba71f1 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
@@ -207,8 +207,6 @@ comment "CPU frequency scaling drivers"
config CPUFREQ_DT
tristate "Generic DT based cpufreq driver"
depends on HAVE_CLK && OF
- # if CPU_THERMAL is on and THERMAL=m, CPUFREQ_DT cannot be =y:
- depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
select CPUFREQ_DT_PLATDEV
select PM_OPP
help
@@ -327,7 +325,6 @@ endif
config QORIQ_CPUFREQ
tristate "CPU frequency scaling driver for Freescale QorIQ SoCs"
depends on OF && COMMON_CLK && (PPC_E500MC || ARM || ARM64)
- depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
select CLK_QORIQ
help
This adds the CPUFreq driver support for Freescale QorIQ SoCs
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
index 688f10227793..ca8567c3152c 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
@@ -29,8 +29,6 @@ config ARM_ARMADA_37XX_CPUFREQ
config ARM_BIG_LITTLE_CPUFREQ
tristate "Generic ARM big LITTLE CPUfreq driver"
depends on ARM_CPU_TOPOLOGY && HAVE_CLK
- # if CPU_THERMAL is on and THERMAL=m, ARM_BIT_LITTLE_CPUFREQ cannot be =y
- depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
select PM_OPP
help
This enables the Generic CPUfreq driver for ARM big.LITTLE platforms.
@@ -38,7 +36,6 @@ config ARM_BIG_LITTLE_CPUFREQ
config ARM_SCPI_CPUFREQ
tristate "SCPI based CPUfreq driver"
depends on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL && COMMON_CLK_SCPI
- depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
help
This adds the CPUfreq driver support for ARM platforms using SCPI
protocol for CPU power management.
@@ -93,7 +90,6 @@ config ARM_KIRKWOOD_CPUFREQ
config ARM_MEDIATEK_CPUFREQ
tristate "CPU Frequency scaling support for MediaTek SoCs"
depends on ARCH_MEDIATEK && REGULATOR
- depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
select PM_OPP
help
This adds the CPUFreq driver support for MediaTek SoCs.
@@ -233,7 +229,6 @@ config ARM_SA1110_CPUFREQ
config ARM_SCMI_CPUFREQ
tristate "SCMI based CPUfreq driver"
depends on ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL || COMPILE_TEST
- depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
select PM_OPP
help
This adds the CPUfreq driver support for ARM platforms using SCMI
diff --git a/drivers/thermal/Kconfig b/drivers/thermal/Kconfig
index 30323426902e..58bb7d72dc2b 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/thermal/Kconfig
@@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ config CPU_THERMAL
bool "generic cpu cooling support"
depends on CPU_FREQ
depends on THERMAL_OF
+ depends on THERMAL=y
help
This implements the generic cpu cooling mechanism through frequency
reduction. An ACPI version of this already exists
--
2.17.1
Use the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV flag to allow cpufreq core to
automatically register as a thermal cooling device.
This allows removal of boiler plate code from the driver.
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c | 24 ++----------------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
index 9fedf627e000..ca955713e070 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
@@ -9,7 +9,6 @@
#include <linux/clk.h>
#include <linux/cpu.h>
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
-#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/err.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/nvmem-consumer.h>
@@ -52,7 +51,6 @@ static struct clk_bulk_data clks[] = {
};
static struct device *cpu_dev;
-static struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
static bool free_opp;
static struct cpufreq_frequency_table *freq_table;
static unsigned int max_freq;
@@ -193,16 +191,6 @@ static int imx6q_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
return 0;
}
-static void imx6q_cpufreq_ready(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
- cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
-
- if (!cdev)
- dev_err(cpu_dev,
- "running cpufreq without cooling device: %ld\n",
- PTR_ERR(cdev));
-}
-
static int imx6q_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
int ret;
@@ -214,22 +202,14 @@ static int imx6q_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
return ret;
}
-static int imx6q_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
- cpufreq_cooling_unregister(cdev);
-
- return 0;
-}
-
static struct cpufreq_driver imx6q_cpufreq_driver = {
- .flags = CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK,
+ .flags = CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK |
+ CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.target_index = imx6q_set_target,
.get = cpufreq_generic_get,
.init = imx6q_cpufreq_init,
- .exit = imx6q_cpufreq_exit,
.name = "imx6q-cpufreq",
- .ready = imx6q_cpufreq_ready,
.attr = cpufreq_generic_attr,
.suspend = cpufreq_generic_suspend,
};
--
2.17.1
Use the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV flag to allow cpufreq core to
automatically register as a thermal cooling device.
This allows removal of boiler plate code from the driver.
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 14 ++------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
index e58bfcb1169e..7ba392911cd0 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
@@ -13,7 +13,6 @@
#include <linux/clk.h>
#include <linux/cpu.h>
-#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
#include <linux/cpumask.h>
#include <linux/err.h>
@@ -30,7 +29,6 @@
struct private_data {
struct opp_table *opp_table;
struct device *cpu_dev;
- struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
const char *reg_name;
bool have_static_opps;
};
@@ -301,7 +299,6 @@ static int cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct private_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
- cpufreq_cooling_unregister(priv->cdev);
dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table(priv->cpu_dev, &policy->freq_table);
if (priv->have_static_opps)
dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table(policy->related_cpus);
@@ -314,21 +311,14 @@ static int cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
return 0;
}
-static void cpufreq_ready(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
- struct private_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
-
- priv->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
-}
-
static struct cpufreq_driver dt_cpufreq_driver = {
- .flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK,
+ .flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK |
+ CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.target_index = set_target,
.get = cpufreq_generic_get,
.init = cpufreq_init,
.exit = cpufreq_exit,
- .ready = cpufreq_ready,
.name = "cpufreq-dt",
.attr = cpufreq_dt_attr,
.suspend = cpufreq_generic_suspend,
--
2.17.1
Use the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV flag to allow cpufreq core to
automatically register as a thermal cooling device.
This allows removal of boiler plate code from the driver.
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
index eb8920d39818..4229fcc31310 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
@@ -14,7 +14,6 @@
#include <linux/clk.h>
#include <linux/cpu.h>
-#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
#include <linux/cpumask.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
@@ -48,7 +47,6 @@ struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info {
struct regulator *sram_reg;
struct clk *cpu_clk;
struct clk *inter_clk;
- struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
struct list_head list_head;
int intermediate_voltage;
bool need_voltage_tracking;
@@ -307,13 +305,6 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
#define DYNAMIC_POWER "dynamic-power-coefficient"
-static void mtk_cpufreq_ready(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
- struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *info = policy->driver_data;
-
- info->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
-}
-
static int mtk_cpu_dvfs_info_init(struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *info, int cpu)
{
struct device *cpu_dev;
@@ -472,7 +463,6 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *info = policy->driver_data;
- cpufreq_cooling_unregister(info->cdev);
dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table(info->cpu_dev, &policy->freq_table);
return 0;
@@ -480,13 +470,13 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
static struct cpufreq_driver mtk_cpufreq_driver = {
.flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK |
- CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY,
+ CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY |
+ CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.target_index = mtk_cpufreq_set_target,
.get = cpufreq_generic_get,
.init = mtk_cpufreq_init,
.exit = mtk_cpufreq_exit,
- .ready = mtk_cpufreq_ready,
.name = "mtk-cpufreq",
.attr = cpufreq_generic_attr,
};
--
2.17.1
Use the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV flag to allow cpufreq core to
automatically register as a thermal cooling device.
This allows removal of boiler plate code from the driver.
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c | 15 ++-------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c
index 3d773f64b4df..4295e5476264 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c
@@ -13,7 +13,6 @@
#include <linux/clk.h>
#include <linux/clk-provider.h>
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
-#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/errno.h>
#include <linux/init.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
@@ -31,7 +30,6 @@
struct cpu_data {
struct clk **pclk;
struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table;
- struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
};
/*
@@ -239,7 +237,6 @@ static int qoriq_cpufreq_cpu_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct cpu_data *data = policy->driver_data;
- cpufreq_cooling_unregister(data->cdev);
kfree(data->pclk);
kfree(data->table);
kfree(data);
@@ -258,23 +255,15 @@ static int qoriq_cpufreq_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
return clk_set_parent(policy->clk, parent);
}
-
-static void qoriq_cpufreq_ready(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
- struct cpu_data *cpud = policy->driver_data;
-
- cpud->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
-}
-
static struct cpufreq_driver qoriq_cpufreq_driver = {
.name = "qoriq_cpufreq",
- .flags = CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS,
+ .flags = CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS |
+ CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV,
.init = qoriq_cpufreq_cpu_init,
.exit = qoriq_cpufreq_cpu_exit,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.target_index = qoriq_cpufreq_target,
.get = cpufreq_generic_get,
- .ready = qoriq_cpufreq_ready,
.attr = cpufreq_generic_attr,
};
--
2.17.1
Use the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV flag to allow cpufreq core to
automatically register as a thermal cooling device.
This allows removal of boiler plate code from the driver.
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c
index 99449738faa4..1db2f6927e13 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c
@@ -22,7 +22,6 @@
#include <linux/cpu.h>
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
#include <linux/cpumask.h>
-#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/export.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/of_platform.h>
@@ -34,7 +33,6 @@
struct scpi_data {
struct clk *clk;
struct device *cpu_dev;
- struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
};
static struct scpi_ops *scpi_ops;
@@ -186,7 +184,6 @@ static int scpi_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct scpi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
- cpufreq_cooling_unregister(priv->cdev);
clk_put(priv->clk);
dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table(priv->cpu_dev, &policy->freq_table);
kfree(priv);
@@ -195,23 +192,16 @@ static int scpi_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
return 0;
}
-static void scpi_cpufreq_ready(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
- struct scpi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
-
- priv->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
-}
-
static struct cpufreq_driver scpi_cpufreq_driver = {
.name = "scpi-cpufreq",
.flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY |
- CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK,
+ CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK |
+ CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.attr = cpufreq_generic_attr,
.get = scpi_cpufreq_get_rate,
.init = scpi_cpufreq_init,
.exit = scpi_cpufreq_exit,
- .ready = scpi_cpufreq_ready,
.target_index = scpi_cpufreq_set_target,
};
--
2.17.1
Use the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV flag to allow cpufreq core to
automatically register as a thermal cooling device.
This allows removal of boiler plate code from the driver.
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
index 242c3370544e..66b633b48eb1 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
@@ -11,7 +11,6 @@
#include <linux/cpu.h>
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
#include <linux/cpumask.h>
-#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/export.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/pm_opp.h>
@@ -22,7 +21,6 @@
struct scmi_data {
int domain_id;
struct device *cpu_dev;
- struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
};
static const struct scmi_handle *handle;
@@ -185,7 +183,6 @@ static int scmi_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct scmi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
- cpufreq_cooling_unregister(priv->cdev);
dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table(priv->cpu_dev, &policy->freq_table);
kfree(priv);
dev_pm_opp_remove_all_dynamic(priv->cpu_dev);
@@ -193,17 +190,11 @@ static int scmi_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
return 0;
}
-static void scmi_cpufreq_ready(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
-{
- struct scmi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
-
- priv->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
-}
-
static struct cpufreq_driver scmi_cpufreq_driver = {
.name = "scmi",
.flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY |
- CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK,
+ CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK |
+ CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.attr = cpufreq_generic_attr,
.target_index = scmi_cpufreq_set_target,
@@ -211,7 +202,6 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver scmi_cpufreq_driver = {
.get = scmi_cpufreq_get_rate,
.init = scmi_cpufreq_init,
.exit = scmi_cpufreq_exit,
- .ready = scmi_cpufreq_ready,
};
static int scmi_cpufreq_probe(struct scmi_device *sdev)
--
2.17.1
On 29-01-19, 10:25, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
>
> In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> private data structure.
>
> Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>
> #include <linux/cpu.h>
> #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> #include <linux/delay.h>
> #include <linux/device.h>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> @@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
>
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
> + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> + policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> +#endif
I am not sure if Rafael wanted it this way but maybe something like this:
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV))
policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
We never wanted ifdef hackery to be in there :)
--
viresh
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 29-01-19, 10:25, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> > Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> > to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> > rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
> >
> > In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> > to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> > private data structure.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> >
> > #include <linux/cpu.h>
> > #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > #include <linux/device.h>
> > #include <linux/init.h>
> > @@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> > cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
> >
> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
> > + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> > + policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > +#endif
>
> I am not sure if Rafael wanted it this way but maybe something like this:
>
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV))
> policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
>
> We never wanted ifdef hackery to be in there :)
OK, that makes more sense. Should I just send out a fixup patch or the
entire series?
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:16 AM Amit Kucheria <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On 29-01-19, 10:25, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> > > Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> > > to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> > > rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
> > >
> > > In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> > > to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> > > private data structure.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> > > Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > > include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > >
> > > #include <linux/cpu.h>
> > > #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > > +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> > > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > > #include <linux/device.h>
> > > #include <linux/init.h>
> > > @@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > > if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> > > cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
> > >
> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
> > > + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> > > + policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > > +#endif
> >
> > I am not sure if Rafael wanted it this way but maybe something like this:
> >
> > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> > cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV))
> > policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> >
> > We never wanted ifdef hackery to be in there :)
>
> OK, that makes more sense. Should I just send out a fixup patch or the
> entire series?
FWIW, I checked drivers/cpufreq and drivers/thermal before converting
over and there is a mixed use of #if IS_ENABLED and if(IS_ENABLED).
Perhaps we should clean it up?
On 29-01-19, 11:50, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:16 AM Amit Kucheria <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 29-01-19, 10:25, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > > All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> > > > Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> > > > to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> > > > rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
> > > >
> > > > In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> > > > to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> > > > private data structure.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > > Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > > Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > > > include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> > > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > > >
> > > > #include <linux/cpu.h>
> > > > #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> > > > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > > > #include <linux/device.h>
> > > > #include <linux/init.h>
> > > > @@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > > > if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> > > > cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
> > > >
> > > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
> > > > + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> > > > + policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > > > +#endif
> > >
> > > I am not sure if Rafael wanted it this way but maybe something like this:
> > >
> > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> > > cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV))
> > > policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > >
> > > We never wanted ifdef hackery to be in there :)
> >
> > OK, that makes more sense. Should I just send out a fixup patch or the
> > entire series?
Single patch should be fine I believe.
> FWIW, I checked drivers/cpufreq and drivers/thermal before converting
> over and there is a mixed use of #if IS_ENABLED and if(IS_ENABLED).
>
> Perhaps we should clean it up?
No objections from me on that.
--
viresh
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:46 AM Amit Kucheria <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On 29-01-19, 10:25, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> > > Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> > > to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> > > rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
> > >
> > > In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> > > to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> > > private data structure.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> > > Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > > include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > >
> > > #include <linux/cpu.h>
> > > #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > > +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> > > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > > #include <linux/device.h>
> > > #include <linux/init.h>
> > > @@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > > if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> > > cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
> > >
> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
> > > + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> > > + policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > > +#endif
> >
> > I am not sure if Rafael wanted it this way but maybe something like this:
> >
> > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> > cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV))
> > policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> >
> > We never wanted ifdef hackery to be in there :)
>
> OK, that makes more sense. Should I just send out a fixup patch or the
> entire series?
Just a fixup patch, please.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 8:09 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 29-01-19, 11:50, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:16 AM Amit Kucheria <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 29-01-19, 10:25, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > > > All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> > > > > Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> > > > > to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> > > > > rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
> > > > >
> > > > > In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> > > > > to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> > > > > private data structure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > > > Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > > > Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > > > > include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> > > > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > > index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > > > >
> > > > > #include <linux/cpu.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > > > > +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/device.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/init.h>
> > > > > @@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > > > > if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> > > > > cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
> > > > >
> > > > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
> > > > > + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> > > > > + policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > > > > +#endif
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure if Rafael wanted it this way but maybe something like this:
> > > >
> > > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> > > > cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV))
> > > > policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > > >
> > > > We never wanted ifdef hackery to be in there :)
> > >
> > > OK, that makes more sense. Should I just send out a fixup patch or the
> > > entire series?
>
> Single patch should be fine I believe.
>
> > FWIW, I checked drivers/cpufreq and drivers/thermal before converting
> > over and there is a mixed use of #if IS_ENABLED and if(IS_ENABLED).
> >
> > Perhaps we should clean it up?
>
> No objections from me on that.
Generally speaking, though, "if (IS_ENABLED(SYMBOL))" can only be used
if all of the symbols in the conditional branch are defined regardless
of whether or not SYMBOL itself is defined, so careful there.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 2:43 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:46 AM Amit Kucheria <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 29-01-19, 10:25, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > > All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> > > > Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> > > > to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> > > > rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
> > > >
> > > > In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> > > > to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> > > > private data structure.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > > Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > > Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > > > include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> > > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > > >
> > > > #include <linux/cpu.h>
> > > > #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> > > > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > > > #include <linux/device.h>
> > > > #include <linux/init.h>
> > > > @@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > > > if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> > > > cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
> > > >
> > > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
> > > > + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> > > > + policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > > > +#endif
> > >
> > > I am not sure if Rafael wanted it this way but maybe something like this:
> > >
> > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> > > cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV))
> > > policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > >
> > > We never wanted ifdef hackery to be in there :)
> >
> > OK, that makes more sense. Should I just send out a fixup patch or the
> > entire series?
>
> Just a fixup patch, please.
Please find attached a fixup patch suitable to add to the top of the
series and use git rebase --autosquash on.
The entire series with this patch squashed in and rebased on top of
today's linux-next is available for your convenience if needed[1]
Thanks,
Amit
[1] https://git.linaro.org/people/amit.kucheria/kernel.git/log/?h=up/cpufreq/auto-register-cooling-dev-v5
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 9:20 PM Amit Kucheria <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 2:43 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:46 AM Amit Kucheria <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 29-01-19, 10:25, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > > > All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> > > > > Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> > > > > to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> > > > > rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
> > > > >
> > > > > In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> > > > > to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> > > > > private data structure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > > > Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > > > Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> > > > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > > > > include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> > > > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > > index e35a886e00bc..0f9b50d3ee91 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > > > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > > > >
> > > > > #include <linux/cpu.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > > > > +#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/device.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/init.h>
> > > > > @@ -1318,6 +1319,11 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > > > > if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> > > > > cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
> > > > >
> > > > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL)
> > > > > + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> > > > > + policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > > > > +#endif
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure if Rafael wanted it this way but maybe something like this:
> > > >
> > > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> > > > cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV))
> > > > policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> > > >
> > > > We never wanted ifdef hackery to be in there :)
> > >
> > > OK, that makes more sense. Should I just send out a fixup patch or the
> > > entire series?
> >
> > Just a fixup patch, please.
>
> Please find attached a fixup patch suitable to add to the top of the
> series and use git rebase --autosquash on.
This isn't Patchwork-friendly, so can you send the complete patch
instead, please?
All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
private data structure.
Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 11 +++++++++++
include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
2 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index a8fa684f5f90..cae730264bc0 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include <linux/cpu.h>
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
+#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>
#include <linux/device.h>
#include <linux/init.h>
@@ -1316,6 +1317,10 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
+ cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
+ policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
+
pr_debug("initialization complete\n");
return 0;
@@ -1403,6 +1408,12 @@ static int cpufreq_offline(unsigned int cpu)
goto unlock;
}
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
+ cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV) {
+ cpufreq_cooling_unregister(policy->cdev);
+ policy->cdev = NULL;
+ }
+
if (cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu)
cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu(policy);
diff --git a/include/linux/cpufreq.h b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
index bd7fbd6a4478..6078eb07a7e4 100644
--- a/include/linux/cpufreq.h
+++ b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
@@ -151,6 +151,9 @@ struct cpufreq_policy {
/* For cpufreq driver's internal use */
void *driver_data;
+
+ /* Pointer to the cooling device if used for thermal mitigation */
+ struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
};
/* Only for ACPI */
@@ -386,6 +389,12 @@ struct cpufreq_driver {
*/
#define CPUFREQ_NO_AUTO_DYNAMIC_SWITCHING BIT(6)
+/*
+ * Set by drivers that want the core to automatically register the cpufreq
+ * driver as a thermal cooling device.
+ */
+#define CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV BIT(7)
+
int cpufreq_register_driver(struct cpufreq_driver *driver_data);
int cpufreq_unregister_driver(struct cpufreq_driver *driver_data);
--
2.17.1
On 30-01-19, 10:52, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
>
> In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> private data structure.
>
> Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 11 +++++++++++
> include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
Thanks for the rework. This looks good now.
--
viresh
On 30/01/2019 06:22, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device.
> Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core
> to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get
> rid of duplicated code in the drivers.
>
> In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer
> to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a
> private data structure.
>
> Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
[ ... ]
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 5:55:07 AM CET Amit Kucheria wrote:
> The CPU cooling driver (cpu_cooling.c) allows the platform's cpufreq
> driver to register as a cooling device and cool down the platform by
> throttling the CPU frequency. In order to be able to auto-register a
> cpufreq driver as a cooling device from the cpufreq core, we need access
> to code inside cpu_cooling.c which, in turn, accesses code inside
> thermal core.
>
> CPU_FREQ is a bool while THERMAL is tristate. In some configurations
> (e.g. allmodconfig), CONFIG_THERMAL ends up as a module while
> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ is compiled in. This leads to following error:
>
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.o: In function `cpufreq_offline':
> cpufreq.c:(.text+0x407c): undefined reference to `cpufreq_cooling_unregister'
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.o: In function `cpufreq_online':
> cpufreq.c:(.text+0x70c0): undefined reference to `of_cpufreq_cooling_register'
>
> Given that platforms using CPU_THERMAL usually want it compiled-in so it
> is available early in boot, make CPU_THERMAL depend on THERMAL being
> compiled-in instead of allowing it to be a module.
>
> As a result of this change, get rid of the ugly (!CPU_THERMAL ||
> THERMAL) dependency in all cpufreq drivers using CPU_THERMAL.
>
> Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig | 3 ---
> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 5 -----
> drivers/thermal/Kconfig | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
> index 608af20a3494..b22e6bba71f1 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig
> @@ -207,8 +207,6 @@ comment "CPU frequency scaling drivers"
> config CPUFREQ_DT
> tristate "Generic DT based cpufreq driver"
> depends on HAVE_CLK && OF
> - # if CPU_THERMAL is on and THERMAL=m, CPUFREQ_DT cannot be =y:
> - depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
> select CPUFREQ_DT_PLATDEV
> select PM_OPP
> help
> @@ -327,7 +325,6 @@ endif
> config QORIQ_CPUFREQ
> tristate "CPU frequency scaling driver for Freescale QorIQ SoCs"
> depends on OF && COMMON_CLK && (PPC_E500MC || ARM || ARM64)
> - depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
> select CLK_QORIQ
> help
> This adds the CPUFreq driver support for Freescale QorIQ SoCs
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> index 688f10227793..ca8567c3152c 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> @@ -29,8 +29,6 @@ config ARM_ARMADA_37XX_CPUFREQ
> config ARM_BIG_LITTLE_CPUFREQ
> tristate "Generic ARM big LITTLE CPUfreq driver"
> depends on ARM_CPU_TOPOLOGY && HAVE_CLK
> - # if CPU_THERMAL is on and THERMAL=m, ARM_BIT_LITTLE_CPUFREQ cannot be =y
> - depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
> select PM_OPP
> help
> This enables the Generic CPUfreq driver for ARM big.LITTLE platforms.
> @@ -38,7 +36,6 @@ config ARM_BIG_LITTLE_CPUFREQ
> config ARM_SCPI_CPUFREQ
> tristate "SCPI based CPUfreq driver"
> depends on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL && COMMON_CLK_SCPI
> - depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
> help
> This adds the CPUfreq driver support for ARM platforms using SCPI
> protocol for CPU power management.
> @@ -93,7 +90,6 @@ config ARM_KIRKWOOD_CPUFREQ
> config ARM_MEDIATEK_CPUFREQ
> tristate "CPU Frequency scaling support for MediaTek SoCs"
> depends on ARCH_MEDIATEK && REGULATOR
> - depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
> select PM_OPP
> help
> This adds the CPUFreq driver support for MediaTek SoCs.
> @@ -233,7 +229,6 @@ config ARM_SA1110_CPUFREQ
> config ARM_SCMI_CPUFREQ
> tristate "SCMI based CPUfreq driver"
> depends on ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL || COMPILE_TEST
> - depends on !CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL
> select PM_OPP
> help
> This adds the CPUfreq driver support for ARM platforms using SCMI
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/Kconfig b/drivers/thermal/Kconfig
> index 30323426902e..58bb7d72dc2b 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/Kconfig
> @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ config CPU_THERMAL
> bool "generic cpu cooling support"
> depends on CPU_FREQ
> depends on THERMAL_OF
> + depends on THERMAL=y
> help
> This implements the generic cpu cooling mechanism through frequency
> reduction. An ACPI version of this already exists
>
Applied, thanks!
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 5:55:06 AM CET Amit Kucheria wrote:
> Add a flag for cpufreq drivers to tell cpufreq core to auto-register
> themselves as a thermal cooling device.
>
> There series converts over all the drivers except arm_big_little.c.
> Tested on SDM845 with the qcom-cpufreq-hw driver. Only compile-tested the
> others.
>
> Things needing fixing (but not a blocker for the series):
> - Look at how to detect that we're not in IKS mode in arm_big_little's
> .ready callback.
>
> Changes since v4:
> - Added IS_ENABLED guards in cpufreq.c
> - Changed flag name to CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV
> - Collected various review tags
>
> Changes since v3:
> - Got rid of wrapper function to register/unregister cooling devices.
> Directly call the function in cpufreq.c
>
> Changes since v2:
> - Get rid of #ifdef'ery and let the pointer exist in all cases
> - Get rid of (!CPU_THERMAL || THERMAL) dependency in all cpufreq drivers'
> Kconfig
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Fix compilation failures with allmodconfig
> - Get rid of #ifdef in cpufreq.c
> - Removed miscellaneous patches and sent them separately
> - Merged patches 1 and 2 from v1
>
> Amit Kucheria (9):
> thermal: cpu_cooling: Require thermal core to be compiled in
> cpufreq: Auto-register the driver as a thermal cooling device if asked
> cpufreq: qcom-hw: Register as a cpufreq cooling device
> cpufreq: imx6q: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
> cpufreq: cpufreq-dt: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
> cpufreq: mediatek: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
> cpufreq: qoriq: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
> cpufreq: scmi: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
> cpufreq: scpi: Use auto-registration of thermal cooling device
>
> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig | 3 ---
> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 5 -----
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 14 ++------------
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c | 24 ++----------------------
> drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
> drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c | 15 ++-------------
> drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
> drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
> drivers/thermal/Kconfig | 1 +
> include/linux/cpufreq.h | 9 +++++++++
> 12 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)
>
>
I've applied the series, thanks!
On 29/01/2019 05:55, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> Use the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV flag to allow cpufreq core to
> automatically register as a thermal cooling device.
>
> This allows removal of boiler plate code from the driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Matthias Brugger <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c | 14 ++------------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> index eb8920d39818..4229fcc31310 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c
> @@ -14,7 +14,6 @@
>
> #include <linux/clk.h>
> #include <linux/cpu.h>
> -#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
> #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> @@ -48,7 +47,6 @@ struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info {
> struct regulator *sram_reg;
> struct clk *cpu_clk;
> struct clk *inter_clk;
> - struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
> struct list_head list_head;
> int intermediate_voltage;
> bool need_voltage_tracking;
> @@ -307,13 +305,6 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>
> #define DYNAMIC_POWER "dynamic-power-coefficient"
>
> -static void mtk_cpufreq_ready(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> -{
> - struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *info = policy->driver_data;
> -
> - info->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
> -}
> -
> static int mtk_cpu_dvfs_info_init(struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *info, int cpu)
> {
> struct device *cpu_dev;
> @@ -472,7 +463,6 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> {
> struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *info = policy->driver_data;
>
> - cpufreq_cooling_unregister(info->cdev);
> dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table(info->cpu_dev, &policy->freq_table);
>
> return 0;
> @@ -480,13 +470,13 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>
> static struct cpufreq_driver mtk_cpufreq_driver = {
> .flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK |
> - CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY,
> + CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY |
> + CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV,
> .verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
> .target_index = mtk_cpufreq_set_target,
> .get = cpufreq_generic_get,
> .init = mtk_cpufreq_init,
> .exit = mtk_cpufreq_exit,
> - .ready = mtk_cpufreq_ready,
> .name = "mtk-cpufreq",
> .attr = cpufreq_generic_attr,
> };
>