On Fri, 2022-04-15 at 14:24 +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 15/04/22 08:14, Hsin-Yi Wang ha scritto: > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 1:59 PM Rex-BC Chen < > > rex-bc.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > To prevent infinite loop when tracking voltage, we calculate the > > > maximum > > > value for each platform data. > > > We assume min voltage is 0 and tracking target voltage using > > > min_volt_shift for each iteration. > > > The retry_max is 3 times of expeted iteration count. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rex-BC Chen <rex-bc.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I'm sorry Rex, but this commit has to be squashed with 09/15, as the > logic is > that each commit has to be acceptable, and 09/15 is not, without this > fix. > > Besides, as Hsin-Yi suggested, calculating this every time may hit > performance, > but at the same time I don't want to lose this explicit > calculation... > Hello Angelo, I will squash thius patch into 9/15 and will use info->vtrack_max to record the value in probe function. Thanks! BRs, Rex > > > --- > > > drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c > > > b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c > > > index cc44a7a9427a..d4c00237e862 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mediatek-cpufreq.c > > > @@ -86,6 +86,16 @@ static int mtk_cpufreq_voltage_tracking(struct > > > mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *info, > > > struct regulator *proc_reg = info->proc_reg; > > > struct regulator *sram_reg = info->sram_reg; > > > int pre_vproc, pre_vsram, new_vsram, vsram, vproc, ret; > > > + int retry_max; > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * We assume min voltage is 0 and tracking target voltage > > > using > > > + * min_volt_shift for each iteration. > > > + * The retry_max is 3 times of expeted iteration count. > > > + */ > > > + retry_max = 3 * DIV_ROUND_UP(max(info->soc_data- > > > >sram_max_volt, > > > + info->soc_data- > > > >proc_max_volt), > > > + info->soc_data- > > > >min_volt_shift); > > > > mtk_cpufreq_voltage_tracking() will be called very frequently. > > retry_max is the same every time mtk_cpufreq_voltage_tracking() is > > called. Is it better to calculate before and store in > > mtk_cpu_dvfs_info? > > > > ...so I agree with this solution: perhaps you can add a "vtrack_max" > variable to > mtk_cpu_dvfs_info as suggested, and fill in that one in function > mtk_cpu_dvfs_info_init(), where we effectively initialize all-the- > things. > > Cheers, > Angelo
