Hi Dietmar, thanks for the review and spotting this. On 03/12/2018 14:46, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > +cc: Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > On 11/27/18 2:24 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> In the case of asymmetric SoC with the same micro-architecture, we >> have a group of CPUs with smaller OPPs than the other group. One >> example is the 96boards dragonboard 820c. There is no dmips/MHz >> difference between both groups, so no need to specify the values in >> the DT. Unfortunately, without these defined, there is no scaling >> capacity computation triggered, so we need to write >> 'capacity-dmips-mhz' for each CPU with the same value in order to >> force the scaled capacity computation. >> >> In order to fix this situation, allocate 'raw_capacity' so the pointer >> is set and the init_cpu_capacity_callback() function can be called. >> >> This was tested on db820c: >> - specified values in the DT (correct results) >> - partial values defined in the DT (error + fallback to defaults) >> - no specified values in the DT (correct results) >> >> correct results are: >> cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpu_capacity >> 758 >> 758 >> 1024 >> 1024 >> >> ... respectively for CPU0, CPU1, CPU2 and CPU3. >> >> That reflects the capacity for the max frequencies 1593600 and 2150400. > > [...] > > I'm afraid that this change is incompatible with the still existing > cpu_efficiency interface we have in Arm32 for A15/A7 systems like Arm TC2: > > In case you specify clock-frequency dt properties per cpu for such a > system, the cpu_capacity values are determined via the cpu_efficiency > code in arch/arm/kernel/topology.c. > > So on Arm TC2 with clock-frequency = <1000000000> [A15] and <800000000> > [A7] you get: > > root@linaro-nano:~# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpu_capacity > 606 > 1441 > 1441 > 606 > 606 > > With your patches on top (cpu_capacity functionality in > drivers/base/arch_topology.c does not have to be switched on by > specifying capacity-dmips-mhz dt properties anymore) we end up scaling > by max frequency again: > > root@linaro-nano:~# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpu_capacity > 358 > 1024 > 1024 > 358 > 358 > > I tried to remove the cpu_efficiency based API a year ago but Russell > pointed out that the compatibility has to be maintained for longer: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20171024102718.16113-1-dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx/ > > > I assume that the capacity-dmips-mhz dt property is like a switch to > turn this functionality on for big.Little and so called gold/silver > platforms, which have cores with the same uArch but in frequency domains > with different max frequency values. > > So what's wrong with specifying capacity-dmips-mhz = <1024> for all > cores for those gold/silver platforms? There is nothing wrong, I just don't like to specify in a DT a default values. > I don't expect that there will be > so many of them. And normal SMP platforms (w/o frequency domains w/o > different max frequency values) don't have to execute this code. Fair enough, I will send a DT change, I'm tired of playing mikado with this code. Thanks again for the review. -- Daniel -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
