Hi, On 5/26/21 11:22 AM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote: > On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 11:47 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >> On 4/1/21 9:16 AM, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >>> On 3/31/21 10:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 17:35 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >>>>> On 3/31/21 5:27 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> On 3/31/21 5:03 PM, andrew-sh.cheng wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 17:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You are missing to add these patches to linux-pm mailing list. >>>>>>>> Need to send them to linu-pm ML. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also, before received this series, I tried to clean-up these patches >>>>>>>> on testing branch[1]. So that I add my comment with my clean-up case. >>>>>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!zIrzeDp9vPnm1_SDzVPuzqdHn3zWie9DnfBXaA-j9-CSrVc6aR9_rJQQiw81_CgAPh9XRRs$ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And 'Saravana Kannan <skannan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>' is wrong email address. >>>>>>>> Please update the email or drop this email. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Chanwoo, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you for the advices. >>>>>>> I will resend patch v9 (add to linux-pm ML), remove this patch, and note >>>>>>> that my patch set base on >>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$ >>>>>> >>>>>> I has not yet test this patch[1] on devfreq-testing-passive-gov branch. >>>>>> So that if possible, I'd like you to test your patches with this patch[1] >>>>>> and then if there is no problem, could you send the next patches with patch[1]? >>>>>> >>>>>> [1]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/commit/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov&id=39c80d11a8f42dd63ecea1e0df595a0ceb83b454__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJR2cQqZs$ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for the confusion. I make the devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] >>>>> branch based on latest devfreq-next branch. >>>>> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chanwoo/linux.git/log/?h=devfreq-testing-passive-gov__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!yUlsuxrL5PcbF7o6A9DlCfvoA6w8V8VXKjYIybYyiJg3D0HM-lI2xRuxLUV6b3UJ8WFhg_g$ >>>>> >>>>> First of all, if possible, I want to test them[1] with your patches in this series. >>>>> And then if there are no any problem, please let me know. After confirmed from you, >>>>> I'll send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch. >>>>> How about that? >>>>> >>>> Hi Chanwoo~ >>>> >>>> We will use this on Google Chrome project. >>>> Google Hsin-Yi has test your patch + my patch set v8 [2~8] >>>> >>>> make sure cci devfreqs runs with cpufreq. >>>> suspend resume >>>> speedometer2 benchmark >>>> It is okay. >>>> >>>> Please send the patches of devfreq-testing-passive-gov[1] branch. >>>> >>>> I will send patch v9 base on yours latter. >>> >>> Thanks for your test. I'll send the patches today. >> >> I'm sorry for delay because when I tested the patches >> for devfreq parent type on Odroid-xu3, there are some problem >> related to lazy linking of OPP. So I'm trying to analyze them. >> Unfortunately, we need to postpone these patches to next linux >> version. >> > Hi Chanwoo Choi~ > > It is said that you are busy on another task recently. > May I know your plan on this patch? > Thank you. Sorry for late work. I have a question. When I tested exynos-bus.c with adding the 'required-opp' property on odroid-xu3 board. I got some fail about When calling _set_required_opps(), always _set_required_opp() returns -EBUSY error because of following lazy linking case[1]. [1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/core.c#L896 /* required-opps not fully initialized yet */ if (lazy_linking_pending(opp_table)) return -EBUSY; For calling dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), lazy_link_required_opp_table() function will be called. But, there is constraint[2]. If is_genpd of opp_table is false, driver/opp/of.c cannot resolve the lazy linking issue. [2] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc3/source/drivers/opp/of.c#L386 /* Link required OPPs for all OPPs of the newly added OPP table */ static void lazy_link_required_opp_table(struct opp_table *new_table) { struct opp_table *opp_table, *temp, **required_opp_tables; struct device_node *required_np, *opp_np, *required_table_np; struct dev_pm_opp *opp; int i, ret; /* * We only support genpd's OPPs in the "required-opps" for now, * as we don't know much about other cases. */ if (!new_table->is_genpd) return; Even if this case, there are no problem on your test case? -- Best Regards, Chanwoo Choi Samsung Electronics
