On Friday, May 08, 2015 09:16:44 AM Preeti U Murthy wrote: > On 05/08/2015 02:29 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday, May 07, 2015 05:49:22 PM Preeti U Murthy wrote: > >> On 05/05/2015 02:11 PM, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > >>> On 05/05/2015 12:03 PM, Shilpasri G Bhat wrote: > >>>> Hi Preeti, > >>>> > >>>> On 05/05/2015 09:30 AM, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > >>>>> Hi Shilpa, > >>>>> > >>>>> On 05/04/2015 02:24 PM, Shilpasri G Bhat wrote: > >>>>>> Re-evaluate the chip's throttled state on recieving OCC_THROTTLE > >>>>>> notification by executing *throttle_check() on any one of the cpu on > >>>>>> the chip. This is a sanity check to verify if we were indeed > >>>>>> throttled/unthrottled after receiving OCC_THROTTLE notification. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We cannot call *throttle_check() directly from the notification > >>>>>> handler because we could be handling chip1's notification in chip2. So > >>>>>> initiate an smp_call to execute *throttle_check(). We are irq-disabled > >>>>>> in the notification handler, so use a worker thread to smp_call > >>>>>> throttle_check() on any of the cpu in the chipmask. > >>>>> > >>>>> I see that the first patch takes care of reporting *per-chip* throttling > >>>>> for pmax capping condition. But where are we taking care of reporting > >>>>> "pstate set to safe" and "freq control disabled" scenarios per-chip ? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> IMO let us not have "psafe" and "freq control disabled" states managed > >>>> per-chip. > >>>> Because when the above two conditions occur it is likely to happen > >>>> across all > >>>> chips during an OCC reset cycle. So I am setting 'throttled' to false on > >>>> OCC_ACTIVE and re-verifying if it actually is the case by invoking > >>>> *throttle_check(). > >>> > >>> Alright like I pointed in the previous reply, a comment to indicate that > >>> psafe and freq control disabled conditions will fail when occ is > >>> inactive and that all chips face the consequence of this will help. > >> > >> From your explanation on the thread of the first patch of this series, > >> this will not be required. > >> > >> So, > >> Reviewed-by: Preeti U Murthy <pre...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > OK, so is the whole series reviewed now? > > Yes the whole series has been reviewed.
OK, I'll queue it up for 4.2, then, thanks! -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
