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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190717222340.137578-1-saravanak@google.com> <20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com>
 <20191125112812.26jk5hsdwqfnofc2@vireshk-i7> <20200127061118.5bxei6nghowlmf53@vireshk-i7>
 <b0be1275-c5cb-8171-58fa-64d65f60eaf8@codeaurora.org> <20200130042126.ahkik6ffb5vnzdim@vireshk-i7>
In-Reply-To: <20200130042126.ahkik6ffb5vnzdim@vireshk-i7>
From:   Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@chromium.org>
Date:   Mon, 18 Jan 2021 15:21:59 +0800
Message-ID: <CAJMQK-gmO-tLZkRRxRdgU9eyfo95omw_RnffFVdhv2A6_9T-nQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] OPP: Improve require-opps linking
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc:     Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>,
        Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>,
        MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>,
        Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Andrew-sh.Cheng" <andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 12:21 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 29-01-20, 19:04, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> > I don't have a gen-pd use case to test against but with the is_genpd
> > check removed it works as expected when I used it against this
> > series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11353185/
> >
> > In the lazy_link_required_opps fn shouldn't we skip the dynamic
> > opps in the the opp list?
>
> Tables with dynamic OPPs should not be there in pending_opp_tables
> list and so that function shall never get called for them.
>
> > With ^^ addressed:
> > Reviewed-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
> > Tested-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
>
> Thanks Sibi.
>
> @Saravana: Can you please give your feedback as well? I don't want to
> push something that may end up breaking something else :)
>

Hi Viresh and Saravana,

Do you still have plans to push this? I've tested on mt8183 cci with:

1. [v4,0/5] Add required-opps support to devfreq passive gov
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/cover/20190724014222.110767-1-saravanak@google.com/):
patch 2, 4, 5

2. opp: Allow lazy-linking of required-opps
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20190717222340.137578-4-saravanak@google.com/#23020727),
with minor diff to let non genpd use required-opp as well:
@@ -474,13 +474,6 @@ static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct
opp_table *required_opp_table)
        struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np;
        int i, ret;

-       /*
-        * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now,
-        * as we don't know much about other cases.
-        */
-       if (!required_opp_table->is_genpd)
-               return;
-
        mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock);

        list_for_each_entry_safe(opp_table, temp, &pending_opp_tables,
pending) {

3. PM / devfreq: Add cpu based scaling support to passive_governor and
mt8183 cci, cpufreq series
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mediatek/cover/1594348284-14199-1-git-send-email-andrew-sh.cheng@mediatek.com/)

Thanks

> --
> viresh