Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] OPP: Add support for bandwidth OPP tables

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hey Saravana,

On 2020-01-08 11:46, Saravana Kannan wrote:
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:28 AM Sibi Sankar <sibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hey Saravana,

Spent some time testing this series while
trying out dcvs on SDM845/SC7180. Apart from
the few minor issues it works quite well!

Thanks a lot for testing Sibi. Can you give a tested-by? Glad to hear
it works well.

sry missed this mail. Sure will
add Tested-by in the next revision.


On 2019-12-07 05:54, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Not all devices quantify their performance points in terms of
> frequency.
> Devices like interconnects quantify their performance points in terms
> of
> bandwidth. We need a way to represent these bandwidth levels in OPP.
> So,
> add support for parsing bandwidth OPPs from DT.
>
> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/opp/core.c | 15 +++++++++--
>  drivers/opp/of.c   | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>  drivers/opp/opp.h  |  5 ++++
>  3 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/opp/core.c b/drivers/opp/core.c
> index be7a7d332332..c79bbfac7289 100644
> --- a/drivers/opp/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/opp/core.c
> @@ -1282,11 +1282,21 @@ static bool
> _opp_supported_by_regulators(struct dev_pm_opp *opp,
>       return true;
>  }
>
> +int opp_compare_key(struct dev_pm_opp *opp1, struct dev_pm_opp *opp2)
> +{
> +     if (opp1->rate != opp2->rate)
> +             return opp1->rate < opp2->rate ? -1 : 1;
> +     if (opp1->peak_bw != opp2->peak_bw)
> +             return opp1->peak_bw < opp2->peak_bw ? -1 : 1;
> +     return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static int _opp_is_duplicate(struct device *dev, struct dev_pm_opp
> *new_opp,
>                            struct opp_table *opp_table,
>                            struct list_head **head)
>  {
>       struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> +     int opp_cmp;
>
>       /*
>        * Insert new OPP in order of increasing frequency and discard if
> @@ -1297,12 +1307,13 @@ static int _opp_is_duplicate(struct device
> *dev, struct dev_pm_opp *new_opp,
>        * loop.
>        */
>       list_for_each_entry(opp, &opp_table->opp_list, node) {
> -             if (new_opp->rate > opp->rate) {
> +             opp_cmp = opp_compare_key(new_opp, opp);
> +             if (opp_cmp > 0) {
>                       *head = &opp->node;
>                       continue;
>               }
>
> -             if (new_opp->rate < opp->rate)
> +             if (opp_cmp < 0)
>                       return 0;
>
>               /* Duplicate OPPs */
> diff --git a/drivers/opp/of.c b/drivers/opp/of.c
> index 1cbb58240b80..b565da5a2b1f 100644
> --- a/drivers/opp/of.c
> +++ b/drivers/opp/of.c
> @@ -521,6 +521,44 @@ void dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(struct device
> *dev)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table);
>
> +static int _read_opp_key(struct dev_pm_opp *new_opp, struct
> device_node *np,
> +                      bool *rate_not_available)
> +{
> +     int ret;
> +     u64 rate;
> +     u32 bw;
> +
> +     ret = of_property_read_u64(np, "opp-hz", &rate);
> +     if (!ret) {
> +             /*
> +              * Rate is defined as an unsigned long in clk API, and so
> +              * casting explicitly to its type. Must be fixed once rate is 64
> +              * bit guaranteed in clk API.
> +              */
> +             new_opp->rate = (unsigned long)rate;
> +             goto out;
> +     }
> +
> +     ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "opp-peak-kBps", &bw);
> +     if (!ret) {
> +             new_opp->peak_bw = bw;
> +
> +             if (!of_property_read_u32(np, "opp-avg-kBps", &bw))
> +                     new_opp->avg_bw = bw;
> +     }
> +
> +out:
> +     *rate_not_available = !!ret;
> +     /*
> +      * If ret is 0 at this point, we have already found a key. If we
> +      * haven't found a key yet, then ret already has an error value. In
> +      * either case, we don't need to update ret.
> +      */
> +     of_property_read_u32(np, "opp-level", &new_opp->level);
> +
> +     return ret;
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * _opp_add_static_v2() - Allocate static OPPs (As per 'v2' DT
> bindings)
>   * @opp_table:       OPP table
> @@ -558,26 +596,12 @@ static struct dev_pm_opp
> *_opp_add_static_v2(struct opp_table *opp_table,
>       if (!new_opp)
>               return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
> -     ret = of_property_read_u64(np, "opp-hz", &rate);
> -     if (ret < 0) {
> -             /* "opp-hz" is optional for devices like power domains. */
> -             if (!opp_table->is_genpd) {
> -                     dev_err(dev, "%s: opp-hz not found\n", __func__);
> -                     goto free_opp;
> -             }
> -
> -             rate_not_available = true;
> -     } else {
> -             /*
> -              * Rate is defined as an unsigned long in clk API, and so
> -              * casting explicitly to its type. Must be fixed once rate is 64
> -              * bit guaranteed in clk API.
> -              */
> -             new_opp->rate = (unsigned long)rate;
> +     ret = _read_opp_key(new_opp, np, &rate_not_available);
> +     if (ret) {

if (!opp_table->is_genpd) {

_read_opp_key returns an error for genpd
opps so please check if it is a genpd
opp_table before erroring out here.

Thanks. I'll fix it in the next version.

> +             dev_err(dev, "%s: opp key field not found\n", __func__);
> +             goto free_opp;
>       }
>
> -     of_property_read_u32(np, "opp-level", &new_opp->level);
> -
>       /* Check if the OPP supports hardware's hierarchy of versions or not
> */
>       if (!_opp_is_supported(dev, opp_table, np)) {
>               dev_dbg(dev, "OPP not supported by hardware: %llu\n", rate);
> @@ -616,7 +640,8 @@ static struct dev_pm_opp
> *_opp_add_static_v2(struct opp_table *opp_table,
>       if (of_property_read_bool(np, "opp-suspend")) {
>               if (opp_table->suspend_opp) {
>                       /* Pick the OPP with higher rate as suspend OPP */
> -                     if (new_opp->rate > opp_table->suspend_opp->rate) {
> +                     if (opp_compare_key(new_opp,
> +                                         opp_table->suspend_opp) > 1) {

shouldn't the condition be > 0?

Duh. Thanks. I'll fix it in the next version.

I'm guessing you tested with the fixes you pointed out?

yes


-Saravana

--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux