On Thursday 21 November 2013 12:39 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Sometimes boot loaders set CPU frequency to a value outside of frequency table
> present with cpufreq core. In such cases CPU might be unstable if it has to run
> on that frequency for long duration of time and so its better to set it to a
> frequency which is specified in freq-table. This also makes cpufreq stats
> inconsistent as cpufreq-stats would fail to register because current frequency
> of CPU isn't found in freq-table.
>
> Because we don't want this change to effect boot process badly, we go for the
> next freq which is >= policy->cur ('cur' must be set by now, otherwise we will
> end up setting freq to lowest of the table as 'cur' is initialized to zero).
>
> In case where CPU is already running on one of the frequencies present in
> freq-table, this would turn into a dummy call as __cpufreq_driver_target() would
> return early.
>
> Reported-by: Carlos Hernandez <ceh@xxxxxx>
> Reported-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Copying another mail from Nishant here to get my cc'list back..
On Friday 22 November 2013 05:12 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> I gave this a quick run on my 3.12 kernel:
> http://pastebin.mozilla.org/3649730 is what I applied and output
> http://pastebin.mozilla.org/3649729
>
> I need to see what I might have mucked up.. or see if I can test this
> on 3.13 master on a different board (since OMAP5 wont boot in master
> without clock dts nodes :()..
This happened because of common sense, which was missing in my patch :)
Try this over existing patch:
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 6e8b226..e403388 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1126,13 +1126,19 @@ static int __cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct
subsys_interface *sif,
* In case where CPU is already running on one of the frequencies
* present in freq-table, this would turn into a dummy call as
* __cpufreq_driver_target() would return early.
+ *
+ * We are passing target-freq as "policy->cur - 1" otherwise
+ * __cpufreq_driver_target() would simply fail, as policy->cur will be
+ * equal to target-freq.
*/
if (has_target()) {
- ret = __cpufreq_driver_target(policy, policy->cur,
+ ret = __cpufreq_driver_target(policy, policy->cur - 1,
CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);
- if (ret)
+ if (ret) {
pr_err("%s: Unable to set frequency from table: %d\n",
__func__, ret);
+ goto err_out_unregister;
+ }
}
/* related cpus should atleast have policy->cpus */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
