Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:44:14 +0200
From: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
        Eduardo Valentin <eduardo.valentin@ti.com>,
        "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" <cpufreq@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@samsung.com>,
        Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@majess.pl>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>,
        Myungjoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>, durgadoss.r@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/8] cpufreq:acpi:x86: Adjust the acpi-cpufreq.c code to
 work with common boost solution
Message-id: <20130726114414.6bb7bd65@amdc308.digital.local>
In-reply-to: <CAKohpokjgpiCmynmecs5XtWazz23qJ8USPVtKY-6sk-=MN19Hw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1370502472-7249-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com>
 <1374770011-22171-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com>
 <1374770011-22171-4-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com>
 <CAKohpo=3+JP0ppru5DSo72yWiN3Qg9xjNJX+6KgCNiEupZEMjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130726100940.1974559e@amdc308.digital.local>
 <CAKohpokjgpiCmynmecs5XtWazz23qJ8USPVtKY-6sk-=MN19Hw@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: SPRC Poland
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2521
Lines: 68

On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:54:07 +0530 Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
wrote,
> On 26 July 2013 13:39, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:58:02 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> >> On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> >> > b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> >>
> >> >  static void __init acpi_cpufreq_boost_init(void)
> >> >  {
> >> > +       acpi_cpufreq_driver.boost_supported = false;
> >             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [*]
> >>
> >> Would be better if we do this in else of below if.
> >
> > We need to set boost_supported = false at [*] for the case when:
> > 1. msrs_alloc fails
> > or
> > 2. acpi_cpufreq is built as a module and can be inserted and removed
> > several times. Without [*] we could end up with wrong (not false)
> > initial state.
> 
> Hmm.. Now that I see the code again, we don't need to set it to false
> as it is a global variable and this field is already set to false..

Ok, so then I will remove this line [*].

> 
> >> >         if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CPB) ||
> >> > boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IDA)) { msrs = msrs_alloc();
> >>
> >>
> >> > @@ -1021,12 +995,11 @@ static int __init acpi_cpufreq_init(void)
> >> >                         *iter = &cpb;
> >> >         }
> >> >  #endif
> >> > +       acpi_cpufreq_boost_init();
> >             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [**]
> >>
> >> We are calling it before registering cpufreq driver. Will this have
> >> any complications?
> >
> > When we call [**] after the cpufreq_register_driver [***] we end up
> > with sysfs boost attribute not exported at x86.
> > The boost attribute is exported at [***] only when
> > acpi_cpufreq.boost_supported = true. However support for boost at
> > x86 is evaluated at acpi_cpufreq_boost_init().
> 
> I understand why you moved it above cpufreq driver register. I was
> thinking if there can be few side effects of this..

As fair as I've tested it, there weren't any side effects. 

Moreover the acpi_cpufreq_boost_init() mostly read state of the HW, so
IMHO can be done before cpufreg_register_driver(). 

-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/