On 25.05.2018 11:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <raf...@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Dmitry Osipenko <dig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 24.05.2018 11:01, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 7:37 AM, Dmitry Osipenko <dig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 24.05.2018 07:30, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>>>>> On 23-05-18, 19:00, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>>>>>> PLL_C is running at 600MHz which is significantly higher than the 216MHz
>>>>>>> of the PLL_P and it is known that PLL_C is always-ON because AHB BUS is
>>>>>>> running on that PLL. Let's use PLL_C as intermediate clock source, 
>>>>>>> making
>>>>>>> CPU snappier a tad during of the frequency transition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <dig...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>  drivers/cpufreq/tegra20-cpufreq.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++----
>>>>>>>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra20-cpufreq.c 
>>>>>>> b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra20-cpufreq.c
>>>>>>> index 3ad6bded6efc..4bf5ba7da40b 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra20-cpufreq.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra20-cpufreq.c
>>>>>>> @@ -25,12 +25,13 @@
>>>>>>>  #include <linux/types.h>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  #define PLL_P_FREQ  216000
>>>>>>> +#define PLL_C_FREQ  600000
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  static struct cpufreq_frequency_table freq_table[] = {
>>>>>>>      { .frequency = 216000 },
>>>>>>>      { .frequency = 312000 },
>>>>>>>      { .frequency = 456000 },
>>>>>>> -    { .frequency = 608000 },
>>>>>>> +    { .frequency = 600000 },
>>>>>>>      { .frequency = 760000 },
>>>>>>>      { .frequency = 816000 },
>>>>>>>      { .frequency = 912000 },
>>>>>>> @@ -44,6 +45,7 @@ struct tegra20_cpufreq {
>>>>>>>      struct clk *cpu_clk;
>>>>>>>      struct clk *pll_x_clk;
>>>>>>>      struct clk *pll_p_clk;
>>>>>>> +    struct clk *pll_c_clk;
>>>>>>>      bool pll_x_prepared;
>>>>>>>  };
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -58,7 +60,10 @@ static unsigned int tegra_get_intermediate(struct 
>>>>>>> cpufreq_policy *policy,
>>>>>>>      if (index == 0 || policy->cur == PLL_P_FREQ)
>>>>>>>              return 0;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -    return PLL_P_FREQ;
>>>>>>> +    if (index == 3 || policy->cur == PLL_C_FREQ)
>>>>>>> +            return 0;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So we can choose between two different intermediate frequencies ? And
>>>>>> I didn't like the way magic number 3 is used here. Its prone to errors
>>>>>> and we better use a macro or something else here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like instead of doing index == 3, what about freq_table[index].freq ==
>>>>>> PLL_C_FREQ ? Same for the previous patch as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> The frequency is determined by the parent clock of CCLK (CPU clock), we 
>>>>> can
>>>>> choose between different parents for the CCLK. PLL_C as PLL_P and PLL_X 
>>>>> are
>>>>> among the available parents for the CCLK to choose from and there some 
>>>>> others.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't mind to use freq_table[index].freq, though I'd like to keep 
>>>>> compiled
>>>>> assembly minimal where possible. Hence the freq_table should be made 
>>>>> constant to
>>>>> tell compiler that it doesn't need to emit data fetches for the table 
>>>>> values and
>>>>> could embed the constants into the code where appropriate.
>>>>>
>>>>> Could we constify the "struct cpufreq_frequency_table" within the cpufreq 
>>>>> core?
>>>>> Seems nothing prevents this (I already tried to constify - there are no
>>>>> obstacles), unless some cpufreq driver would try to modify
>>>>> policy->freq_table->... within the cpufreq callback implementation.
>>>>
>>>> Some drivers generate frequency tables out of external data
>>>> unavailable at compile time, like ACPI tables.
>>>
>>> Instead of making the table constant itself (with its values), seems we can 
>>> just
>>> make the policy->freq_table pointer constant. I'll try to make a patch for 
>>> that,
>>> adjusting the pointers in cpufreq core and the drivers. This works for the
>>> acpi-cpufreq at least.
>>
>> Honestly, messing up with the whole subsystem in order to avoid an
>> explicit pointer case doesn't sound right to me.
> 
> Actually, on a second thought I agree that it is better to do it as
> you suggested: make the policy->freq_table pointer constant
> everywhere.
> 
> Sorry for the noise.

No worries.

As I wrote in the reply to the other patch, the Tegra30 support is now on the
way. These changes will collide a tad with the support integration, so I'll
return to re-considering the changes made in this patchset after Tegra30 support
will land. Thank you very much for your reviews and suggestions, I'll take them
into account in the next iteration.

Reply via email to