Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-84813-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Message-ID: <9cc4e465-9979-e4cc-3d2d-84cca307f19e@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:39:34 +0530
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix per-policy boost behavior
Content-Language: en-US
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
CC: <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, <marcan@marcan.st>, <sven@svenpeter.dev>,
        <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>, <rafael@kernel.org>, <xuwei5@hisilicon.com>,
        <zhanjie9@hisilicon.com>, <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        <cristian.marussi@arm.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, <quic_rgottimu@quicinc.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <asahi@lists.linux.dev>,
        <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240227165309.620422-1-quic_sibis@quicinc.com>
 <20240228050703.lixqywrtxravegc6@vireshk-i7>
 <c165dd32-1e51-2fac-38ae-dd7300d36372@quicinc.com>
 <20240228063511.rcntpb3dhbbhf7fb@vireshk-i7>
From: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240228063511.rcntpb3dhbbhf7fb@vireshk-i7>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 2/28/24 12:05, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 28-02-24, 10:44, Sibi Sankar wrote:
>> In the existing code, per-policy flags doesn't have any impact i.e.
>> if cpufreq_driver boost is enabled and one or more of the per-policy
>> boost is disabled, the cpufreq driver will behave as if boost is
>> enabled.
> 
> I see. Good catch. The first patch is fine, just explain the problem
> properly and mention that no one is checking the policy->boost_enabled
> field. It is never read.
> 
>> I had to update the policy->boost_enabled value because we seem
>> to allow enabling cpufreq_driver.boost_enabled from the driver, but I
>> can drop that because it was just for book keeping.
> 
> So with cpufreq_driver->boost_enabled at init time, policy's
> boost_enabled must be set too. Do that in the core during
> initialization of the policy instead.
> 
>> I didn't want
>> to include redundant info from another mail thread that I referenced in
>> the cover letter, but will add more info in the re-spin.
> 
> You don't have to, but you need to explain the exact problem in a bit
> more detail since it wasn't obvious here.

ack, will make these changes in the next re-spin.

-Sibi

>