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;
Date:   Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:05:14 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@linaro.org>,
        Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Cc:     agross@kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, rui.zhang@intel.com,
        daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        tdas@codeaurora.org, mka@chromium.org,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 3/6] cpufreq: qcom-cpufreq-hw: Add dcvs interrupt
 support
Message-ID: <20210712043514.ijp6cm3zuri7u5hb@vireshk-i7>
References: <20210708120656.663851-1-thara.gopinath@linaro.org>
 <20210708120656.663851-4-thara.gopinath@linaro.org>
 <20210709064646.7vjgiba2o7beudly@vireshk-i7>
 <5a98ef2a-d170-f52d-cc48-b838cddaa5c2@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5a98ef2a-d170-f52d-cc48-b838cddaa5c2@linaro.org>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Precedence: bulk

+Lukasz,

On 09-07-21, 11:37, Thara Gopinath wrote:
> On 7/9/21 2:46 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 08-07-21, 08:06, Thara Gopinath wrote:
> > >   static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> > >   {
> > >   	struct platform_device *pdev = cpufreq_get_driver_data();
> > > @@ -370,6 +480,10 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> > >   			dev_warn(cpu_dev, "failed to enable boost: %d\n", ret);
> > >   	}
> > > +	ret = qcom_cpufreq_hw_lmh_init(policy, index);
> > 
> > You missed unregistering EM here (which is also missing from exit,
> > which you need to fix first in a separate patch).
> 
> Hi!
> 
> So how exactly do you do this? I checked other users of the api and I do not
> see any free.

Lukasz,

I don't see the cpufreq drivers ever calling dev_pm_opp_of_unregister_em(), and
even if they called, it would translate to em_dev_unregister_perf_domain(),
which has this:

	if (_is_cpu_device(dev))
		return;

I am not sure what's going on here, can you help ?

-- 
viresh