Hi Rafael,
On 4/18/2017 8:28 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 01:49:59 PM Prashanth Prakash wrote:
>> Read lowest non linear perf in cppc_get_perf_caps so that it can be exposed
>> via sysfs to the usespace. Lowest non linear perf is the lowest performance
>> level at which nonlinear power savings are achieved.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Prashanth Prakash <pprakash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Except that I would spell "nonlinear" as one word which appears to be a common
> practice, it looks OK to me.
>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
>> include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>> index 3ca0729..f5f3c29 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>> @@ -972,9 +972,9 @@ static int cpc_write(int cpu, struct cpc_register_resource *reg_res, u64 val)
>> int cppc_get_perf_caps(int cpunum, struct cppc_perf_caps *perf_caps)
>> {
>> struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpunum);
>> - struct cpc_register_resource *highest_reg, *lowest_reg, *ref_perf,
>> - *nom_perf;
>> - u64 high, low, nom;
>> + struct cpc_register_resource *highest_reg, *lowest_reg,
>> + *lowest_non_linear_reg, *nominal_reg;
>> + u64 high, low, nom, low_non_linear;
> min_nonlinear here?
>
>> int ret = 0, regs_in_pcc = 0;
>>
>> if (!cpc_desc) {
>> @@ -984,12 +984,12 @@ int cppc_get_perf_caps(int cpunum, struct cppc_perf_caps *perf_caps)
>>
>> highest_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[HIGHEST_PERF];
>> lowest_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[LOWEST_PERF];
>> - ref_perf = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[REFERENCE_PERF];
>> - nom_perf = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[NOMINAL_PERF];
>> + lowest_non_linear_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[LOW_NON_LINEAR_PERF];
>> + nominal_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[NOMINAL_PERF];
>>
>> /* Are any of the regs PCC ?*/
>> if (CPC_IN_PCC(highest_reg) || CPC_IN_PCC(lowest_reg) ||
>> - CPC_IN_PCC(ref_perf) || CPC_IN_PCC(nom_perf)) {
>> + CPC_IN_PCC(lowest_non_linear_reg) || CPC_IN_PCC(nominal_reg)) {
>> regs_in_pcc = 1;
>> down_write(&pcc_data.pcc_lock);
>> /* Ring doorbell once to update PCC subspace */
>> @@ -1005,10 +1005,13 @@ int cppc_get_perf_caps(int cpunum, struct cppc_perf_caps *perf_caps)
>> cpc_read(cpunum, lowest_reg, &low);
>> perf_caps->lowest_perf = low;
>>
>> - cpc_read(cpunum, nom_perf, &nom);
>> + cpc_read(cpunum, nominal_reg, &nom);
>> perf_caps->nominal_perf = nom;
>>
>> - if (!high || !low || !nom)
>> + cpc_read(cpunum, lowest_non_linear_reg, &low_non_linear);
>> + perf_caps->lowest_non_linear_perf = low_non_linear;
>> +
>> + if (!high || !low || !nom || !low_non_linear)
>> ret = -EFAULT;
>>
>> out_err:
>> diff --git a/include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h b/include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h
>> index 427a7c3..3f64660 100644
>> --- a/include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h
>> +++ b/include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h
>> @@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ struct cppc_perf_caps {
>> u32 highest_perf;
>> u32 nominal_perf;
>> u32 lowest_perf;
>> + u32 lowest_non_linear_perf;
>> };
>>
>> struct cppc_perf_ctrls {
>>
> I can make the above changes for you if you agree. :-)
Thanks! Yes, you can make those correction :-)
--
Thanks,
Prashanth
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
