Received: by 2002:a25:1985:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 127csp984915ybz; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 00:07:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIWKCCEOmOqZ5vBo5hZcbhrWePpI3wtCviC721Ac9PmF7Jz01UIA0vQnZ/M4q1qtnR+ghdL X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d685:: with SMTP id d5mr16809150edr.340.1587020872434; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 00:07:52 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1587020872; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=JAIX+q6gqqVST1Bn9fgrkGJMrjecf361Ky0n+/T08H7IgHT+lfucvlxdzOz9a8j7yQ myhCEuc0yoRKt5pW+Z7Lfzz0czK3dQN3pqCnE+U4fE87Oaq+RanD7bSI6FKySFIC/Rvp V6U/V1DbFuJkNTmCR9l0o3kOsQjWWk59vAttmnUwmIdl+YpkpUajZXosW0mBsu/CwCnR T6S6V7Teas6t4FyQN6noakyFqD11lMSAWM1Me6DKxZZ8Gb2WYCsVRXji8GZN78cKe5EG 5otZh8+E7RC6r/BUG3MUjd3ZK3N7TbciHyH2caebqV4qbCJ8NyaqdZ+NkZaj/bBOtHDp mmVA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:dkim-signature:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=MEcFP8G3VxgwBAt3A1oRVQWL07CnwPJfWLc3Wywyjpg=; b=kEs4cZEE2IUptnc0Q29v7it9PNywby/QDym+M9ISIIOTXRTiL0l5RgJyLaiikr5xxy hP5iJRUyQEzhweifCqIw8kLEbZ/rNoElT7MSbCWwuNC//Q/7v31/7TG4d6z9BEKVkQG2 Q0oif/BqBKZB5KOYS7Bm8Faw/0ZR4a99iCf5cUJiwsW5ajeceZfsTSPSkEweyLY+diYk zNsUjyrQEvjeE52zLREc/oS4c53DB5Q2ZxEX51GdPmzFnIshc55MtyQtw5+hAg8553TG gCpwAVKzi5c+llgvYuNc6Xd1M4ckKzHYrRMp2lX+cHYhVAtgAEqkPbH9gWgqZ4JdSi/A 5qxQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@nvidia.com header.s=n1 header.b=Ym1Zof5k; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=nvidia.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k12si7818427edn.425.2020.04.16.00.07.28; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 00:07:52 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@nvidia.com header.s=n1 header.b=Ym1Zof5k; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=nvidia.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2438025AbgDPHGZ (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 03:06:25 -0400 Received: from hqnvemgate25.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.64]:4641 "EHLO hqnvemgate25.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2437186AbgDPHGU (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 03:06:20 -0400 Received: from hqpgpgate102.nvidia.com (Not Verified[216.228.121.13]) by hqnvemgate25.nvidia.com (using TLS: TLSv1.2, DES-CBC3-SHA) id ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 00:05:19 -0700 Received: from hqmail.nvidia.com ([172.20.161.6]) by hqpgpgate102.nvidia.com (PGP Universal service); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 00:06:18 -0700 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by hqpgpgate102.nvidia.com on Thu, 16 Apr 2020 00:06:18 -0700 Received: from DRHQMAIL107.nvidia.com (10.27.9.16) by HQMAIL105.nvidia.com (172.20.187.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 07:06:18 +0000 Received: from [10.24.37.103] (10.124.1.5) by DRHQMAIL107.nvidia.com (10.27.9.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 07:06:14 +0000 Subject: Re: [TEGRA194_CPUFREQ Patch 2/3] cpufreq: Add Tegra194 cpufreq driver To: Viresh Kumar CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , Sumit Gupta References: <20200406025549.qfwzlk3745y3r274@vireshk-i7> <3ab4136c-8cca-c2f9-d286-b82dac23e720@nvidia.com> <20200408055301.jhvu5bc2luu3b5qr@vireshk-i7> <08307e54-0e14-14a3-7d6a-d59e1e04a683@nvidia.com> <20200409074415.twpzu2n4frqlde7b@vireshk-i7> <00390070-38a1-19aa-ca59-42c4658bee7e@nvidia.com> <20200413062141.a6hmwipexhv3sctq@vireshk-i7> <64b609f1-efb1-425f-a91a-27a492bd3ec4@nvidia.com> <20200414054504.e3qn2cnxqur4sclw@vireshk-i7> <20200416033715.hscztwkxie2o5i3r@vireshk-i7> From: Sumit Gupta Message-ID: <8ea80551-b47c-3dd5-4efa-6befecc279e1@nvidia.com> Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 12:36:30 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200416033715.hscztwkxie2o5i3r@vireshk-i7> X-Originating-IP: [10.124.1.5] X-ClientProxiedBy: HQMAIL105.nvidia.com (172.20.187.12) To DRHQMAIL107.nvidia.com (10.27.9.16) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1587020719; bh=MEcFP8G3VxgwBAt3A1oRVQWL07CnwPJfWLc3Wywyjpg=; h=X-PGP-Universal:Subject:To:CC:References:From:Message-ID:Date: User-Agent:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:X-Originating-IP: X-ClientProxiedBy:Content-Type:Content-Language: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Ym1Zof5kV4ZzNBXuhXOY6pCMuNXLHXbISr+b04QIKvNWYzdvddezwVuXMpid2BF5/ dPfkdQNOTOxwvEjv0+wd7hCnNKkb8FlFD8nTuS66Zsv/E+tYrpbTFQtsnTyCM0IHed QJxsYrwBMxHjeNsU7m177c0g4VNPYU5YLdeyBsjHvmbkdksZ0xTbWVzZeIvZXdJgj7 qnnuPfvuQoOA+S/MvnDcKQZN5bkim4KueK5S7THIGk9WB1KWKuJPst/htuBdxTdd78 SsokaJxGXH+ZdN77GNGGGQ9I3cwDBWGmBrY6dMiePRVUIu9mpDj4o3swCIo5ZHNWFH nsLq+/ogcmUUg== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 16/04/20 9:07 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > On 15-04-20, 16:55, Sumit Gupta wrote: >> >> >> On 14/04/20 11:15 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments >>> >>> >>> On 13-04-20, 17:50, Sumit Gupta wrote: >>>> This was done considering long delay value as explained previously. >>>> Do you think that smp_call_function_single() would be better than work queue >>>> here? >>> >>> Don't work with assumptions, you should test both and see which one >>> works better. Workqueue should never be faster than >>> smp_call_function_single() with my understanding. >> Checked the time taken and its almost same in both cases. >> Earlier we used smp_call_function_single(), but delay time period was small >> in that SOC. In T194, the time period was more. So, this is an optimization >> done because using work queue has advantage as interrupts will not be >> disabled for that period. > > Hmm, okay, keep the workqueue and mention the required details in a > comment for everyone to understand why the implementation is done that > way. > sure, thank you! > -- > viresh >