Hi Rafael,

Thanks for your reply !

On 2020/5/28 20:48, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, May 22, 2020 5:34:35 AM CEST Xiongfeng Wang wrote:
>> Macro 'for_each_active_policy()' is defined internally. To avoid some
>> cpufreq driver needing this macro to iterate over all the policies in
>> '.set_boost' callback, we redefine '.set_boost' to act on only one
>> policy and pass the policy as an argument.
>> 'cpufreq_boost_trigger_state()' iterate over all the policies to set
>> boost for the system. This is preparation for adding SW BOOST support
>> for CPPC.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfe...@huawei.com>
>> Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 10 ++++----
>>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c      | 53 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>  include/linux/cpufreq.h        |  2 +-
>>  3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
>> index 289e8ce..813aabf 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
>> @@ -126,12 +126,14 @@ static void boost_set_msr_each(void *p_en)
>>      boost_set_msr(enable);
>>  }
>>  
>> -static int set_boost(int val)
>> +static int set_boost(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, int val)
>>  {
>>      get_online_cpus();
>> -    on_each_cpu(boost_set_msr_each, (void *)(long)val, 1);
>> +    on_each_cpu_mask(policy->cpus, boost_set_msr_each,
>> +                     (void *)(long)val, 1);
>>      put_online_cpus();
>> -    pr_debug("Core Boosting %sabled.\n", val ? "en" : "dis");
>> +    pr_debug("CPU %*pbl: Core Boosting %sabled.\n",
>> +             cpumask_pr_args(policy->cpus), val ? "en" : "dis");
>>  
>>      return 0;
>>  }
>> @@ -162,7 +164,7 @@ static ssize_t store_cpb(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, 
>> const char *buf,
>>      if (ret || val > 1)
>>              return -EINVAL;
>>  
>> -    set_boost(val);
>> +    set_boost(policy, val);
>>  
>>      return count;
>>  }
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> index d03f250..d0d86b1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> @@ -2532,34 +2532,29 @@ void cpufreq_update_limits(unsigned int cpu)
>>  /*********************************************************************
>>   *               BOOST                                                   *
>>   *********************************************************************/
>> -static int cpufreq_boost_set_sw(int state)
>> +static int cpufreq_boost_set_sw(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, int state)
>>  {
>> -    struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>> -
>> -    for_each_active_policy(policy) {
>> -            int ret;
>> -
>> -            if (!policy->freq_table)
>> -                    return -ENXIO;
>> +    int ret;
>>  
>> -            ret = cpufreq_frequency_table_cpuinfo(policy,
>> -                                                  policy->freq_table);
>> -            if (ret) {
>> -                    pr_err("%s: Policy frequency update failed\n",
>> -                           __func__);
>> -                    return ret;
>> -            }
>> +    if (!policy->freq_table)
>> +            return -ENXIO;
>>  
>> -            ret = freq_qos_update_request(policy->max_freq_req, 
>> policy->max);
>> -            if (ret < 0)
>> -                    return ret;
>> +    ret = cpufreq_frequency_table_cpuinfo(policy, policy->freq_table);
>> +    if (ret) {
>> +            pr_err("%s: Policy frequency update failed\n", __func__);
>> +            return ret;
>>      }
>>  
>> +    ret = freq_qos_update_request(policy->max_freq_req, policy->max);
>> +    if (ret < 0)
>> +            return ret;
>> +
>>      return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>>  int cpufreq_boost_trigger_state(int state)
>>  {
>> +    struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>>      unsigned long flags;
>>      int ret = 0;
>>  
>> @@ -2570,16 +2565,22 @@ int cpufreq_boost_trigger_state(int state)
> 
> AFAICS this gets called via sysfs without any cpufreq locking whatever, so
> I'm not really sure what causes it to be safe with respect to CPU offline /
> online, especially if the ->set_boost() callback only wants to do stuff
> for CPUs that are online.

Thanks for your advice. Yes, we have 'cpu_hotplug_lock' in 'set_boost' in
acpi_cpufreq. But we don't have 'cpu_hotplug_lock' for the general SW BOOST
framework. So I think I will need to move the lock from 'set_boost()' to
'store_cpb()' and add lock in 'cpufreq_boost_trigger_state' for the general SW
BOOST.

Thanks,
Xiongfeng

> 
>>      cpufreq_driver->boost_enabled = state;
>>      write_unlock_irqrestore(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags);
>>  
>> -    ret = cpufreq_driver->set_boost(state);
>> -    if (ret) {
>> -            write_lock_irqsave(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags);
>> -            cpufreq_driver->boost_enabled = !state;
>> -            write_unlock_irqrestore(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags);
>> -
>> -            pr_err("%s: Cannot %s BOOST\n",
>> -                   __func__, state ? "enable" : "disable");
>> +    for_each_active_policy(policy) {
>> +            ret = cpufreq_driver->set_boost(policy, state);
>> +            if (ret)
>> +                    goto err_reset_state;
>>      }
>>  
>> +    return 0;
>> +
>> +err_reset_state:
>> +    write_lock_irqsave(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags);
>> +    cpufreq_driver->boost_enabled = !state;
>> +    write_unlock_irqrestore(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags);
>> +
>> +    pr_err("%s: Cannot %s BOOST\n",
>> +           __func__, state ? "enable" : "disable");
>> +
>>      return ret;
>>  }
>>  
>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpufreq.h b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
>> index 67d5950..3494f67 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/cpufreq.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
>> @@ -367,7 +367,7 @@ struct cpufreq_driver {
>>  
>>      /* platform specific boost support code */
>>      bool            boost_enabled;
>> -    int             (*set_boost)(int state);
>> +    int             (*set_boost)(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, int state);
>>  };
>>  
>>  /* flags */
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 

Reply via email to