linux-toradex.git/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c, branch v5.18 Linux kernel for Apalis and Colibri modules cpufreq: unify show() and store() naming and use __ATTR_XX 2022-03-10T18:55:05+00:00 Lianjie Zhang zhanglianjie@uniontech.com 2022-03-10T14:38:30+00:00 85750bcd480c74b13661ee2c9db49de500fd2823 Usually, sysfs attributes have .show and .store and their naming convention is filename_show() and filename_store(). But in cpufreq the naming convention of these functions is show_filename() and store_filename() which prevents __ATTR_RW() and __ATTR_RO() from being used in there to simplify code. Accordingly, change the naming convention of the sysfs .show and .store methods in cpufreq to follow the one expected by __ATTR_RW() and __ATTR_RO() and use these macros in that code. Signed-off-by: Lianjie Zhang <zhanglianjie@uniontech.com> [ rjw: Subject and changelog edits ] Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
Usually, sysfs attributes have .show and .store and their naming
convention is filename_show() and filename_store().

But in cpufreq the naming convention of these functions is
show_filename() and store_filename() which prevents __ATTR_RW() and
__ATTR_RO() from being used in there to simplify code.

Accordingly, change the naming convention of the sysfs .show and
.store methods in cpufreq to follow the one expected by __ATTR_RW()
and __ATTR_RO() and use these macros in that code.

Signed-off-by: Lianjie Zhang <zhanglianjie@uniontech.com>
[ rjw: Subject and changelog edits ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: use default_groups in kobj_type 2021-12-28T18:13:12+00:00 Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org 2021-12-28T13:19:12+00:00 fe262d5c1fc54fac8703d3d82a14aaad9627a168 There are currently 2 ways to create a set of sysfs files for a kobj_type, through the default_attrs field, and the default_groups field. Move the cpufreq code to use default_groups field which has been the preferred way since aa30f47cf666 ("kobject: Add support for default attribute groups to kobj_type") so that we can soon get rid of the obsolete default_attrs field. Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
There are currently 2 ways to create a set of sysfs files for a
kobj_type, through the default_attrs field, and the default_groups
field.  Move the cpufreq code to use default_groups field which has been
the preferred way since aa30f47cf666 ("kobject: Add support for default
attribute groups to kobj_type") so that we can soon get rid of the
obsolete default_attrs field.

Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Use CPUFREQ_RELATION_E in DVFS governors 2021-10-05T14:33:05+00:00 Vincent Donnefort vincent.donnefort@arm.com 2021-09-08T14:05:29+00:00 b894d20e6867f04827c7817fbc155460ff108f6f Let the governors schedutil, conservative and ondemand to work, if possible on efficient frequencies only. Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
Let the governors schedutil, conservative and ondemand to work, if possible
on efficient frequencies only.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Register governors at core_initcall 2020-07-02T11:03:30+00:00 Quentin Perret qperret@google.com 2020-06-29T08:24:59+00:00 10dd8573b09e84b81539d939d55ebdb6a36c5f3a Currently, most CPUFreq governors are registered at the core_initcall time when the given governor is the default one, and the module_init time otherwise. In preparation for letting users specify the default governor on the kernel command line, change all of them to be registered at the core_initcall unconditionally, as it is already the case for the schedutil and performance governors. This will allow us to assume that builtin governors have been registered before the built-in CPUFreq drivers probe. And since all governors have similar init/exit patterns now, introduce two new macros, cpufreq_governor_{init,exit}(), to factorize the code. Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> [ rjw: Changelog ] Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
Currently, most CPUFreq governors are registered at the core_initcall
time when the given governor is the default one, and the module_init
time otherwise.

In preparation for letting users specify the default governor on the
kernel command line, change all of them to be registered at the
core_initcall unconditionally, as it is already the case for the
schedutil and performance governors. This will allow us to assume
that builtin governors have been registered before the built-in
CPUFreq drivers probe.

And since all governors have similar init/exit patterns now, introduce
two new macros, cpufreq_governor_{init,exit}(), to factorize the code.

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
[ rjw: Changelog ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Initialize the governors in core_initcall 2019-11-07T06:00:26+00:00 Amit Kucheria amit.kucheria@linaro.org 2019-10-21T12:15:12+00:00 3f6ec871e1c2b360aaf022e90bb99dcc016b3874 Initialize the cpufreq governors earlier to allow for earlier performance control during the boot process. Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/b98eae9b44eb2f034d7f5d12a161f5f831be1eb7.1571656015.git.amit.kucheria@linaro.org 
Initialize the cpufreq governors earlier to allow for earlier
performance control during the boot process.

Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/b98eae9b44eb2f034d7f5d12a161f5f831be1eb7.1571656015.git.amit.kucheria@linaro.org
treewide: Replace GPLv2 boilerplate/reference with SPDX - rule 500 2019-06-19T15:09:55+00:00 Thomas Gleixner tglx@linutronix.de 2019-06-04T08:11:33+00:00 d2912cb15bdda8ba4a5dd73396ad62641af2f520 Based on 2 normalized pattern(s): this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify it under the terms of the gnu general public license version 2 as published by the free software foundation this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify it under the terms of the gnu general public license version 2 as published by the free software foundation # extracted by the scancode license scanner the SPDX license identifier GPL-2.0-only has been chosen to replace the boilerplate/reference in 4122 file(s). Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net> Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org> Reviewed-by: Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net> Cc: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190604081206.933168790@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
Based on 2 normalized pattern(s):

  this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify
  it under the terms of the gnu general public license version 2 as
  published by the free software foundation

  this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify
  it under the terms of the gnu general public license version 2 as
  published by the free software foundation #

extracted by the scancode license scanner the SPDX license identifier

  GPL-2.0-only

has been chosen to replace the boilerplate/reference in 4122 file(s).

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net>
Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net>
Cc: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190604081206.933168790@linutronix.de
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
cpufreq: conservative: Take limits changes into account properly 2018-10-16T10:34:45+00:00 Rafael J. Wysocki rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com 2018-10-15T21:21:05+00:00 da5e79bc70b84971d2b3a55fb252e34e51d81d48 If the policy limits change between invocations of cs_dbs_update(), the requested frequency value stored in dbs_info may not be updated and the function may use a stale value of it next time. Moreover, if idle periods are takem into account by cs_dbs_update(), the requested frequency value stored in dbs_info may be below the min policy limit, which is incorrect. To fix these problems, always update the requested frequency value in dbs_info along with the local copy of it when the previous requested frequency is beyond the policy limits and avoid decreasing the requested frequency below the min policy limit when taking idle periods into account. Fixes: abb6627910a1 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix next frequency selection) Fixes: 00bfe05889e9 (cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster for deferred updates) Reported-by: Waldemar Rymarkiewicz <waldemarx.rymarkiewicz@intel.com> Cc: All applicable <stable@vger.kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Waldemar Rymarkiewicz <waldemarx.rymarkiewicz@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> 
If the policy limits change between invocations of cs_dbs_update(),
the requested frequency value stored in dbs_info may not be updated
and the function may use a stale value of it next time.  Moreover, if
idle periods are takem into account by cs_dbs_update(), the requested
frequency value stored in dbs_info may be below the min policy limit,
which is incorrect.

To fix these problems, always update the requested frequency value
in dbs_info along with the local copy of it when the previous
requested frequency is beyond the policy limits and avoid decreasing
the requested frequency below the min policy limit when taking
idle periods into account.

Fixes: abb6627910a1 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix next frequency selection)
Fixes: 00bfe05889e9 (cpufreq: conservative: Decrease frequency faster for deferred updates)
Reported-by: Waldemar Rymarkiewicz <waldemarx.rymarkiewicz@intel.com>
Cc: All applicable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Acked-by: Waldemar Rymarkiewicz <waldemarx.rymarkiewicz@intel.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
cpufreq: governor: Drop min_sampling_rate 2017-07-22T00:25:20+00:00 Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org 2017-07-19T10:12:41+00:00 2d045036322c29b69c22f06530f1130338d06373 The cpufreq core and governors aren't supposed to set a limit on how fast we want to try changing the frequency. This is currently done for the legacy governors with help of min_sampling_rate. At worst, we may end up setting the sampling rate to a value lower than the rate at which frequency can be changed and then one of the CPUs in the policy will be only changing frequency for ever. But that is something for the user to decide and there is no need to have special handling for such cases in the core. Leave it for the user to figure out. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
The cpufreq core and governors aren't supposed to set a limit on how
fast we want to try changing the frequency. This is currently done for
the legacy governors with help of min_sampling_rate.

At worst, we may end up setting the sampling rate to a value lower than
the rate at which frequency can be changed and then one of the CPUs in
the policy will be only changing frequency for ever.

But that is something for the user to decide and there is no need to
have special handling for such cases in the core. Leave it for the user
to figure out.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: conservative: Allow down_threshold to take values from 1 to 10 2017-06-12T12:28:07+00:00 Tomasz Wilczyński twilczynski@naver.com 2017-06-11T08:28:39+00:00 b8e11f7d2791bd9320be1c6e772a60b2aa093e45 Commit 27ed3cd2ebf4 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking) removed the 10 point substraction when comparing the load against down_threshold but did not remove the related limit for the down_threshold value. As a result, down_threshold lower than 11 is not allowed even though values from 1 to 10 do work correctly too. The comment ("cannot be lower than 11 otherwise freq will not fall") also does not apply after removing the substraction. For this reason, allow down_threshold to take any value from 1 to 99 and fix the related comment. Fixes: 27ed3cd2ebf4 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking) Signed-off-by: Tomasz Wilczyński <twilczynski@naver.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: 3.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.10+ Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
Commit 27ed3cd2ebf4 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency
decrease checking) removed the 10 point substraction when comparing the
load against down_threshold but did not remove the related limit for the
down_threshold value.  As a result, down_threshold lower than 11 is not
allowed even though values from 1 to 10 do work correctly too. The
comment ("cannot be lower than 11 otherwise freq will not fall") also
does not apply after removing the substraction.

For this reason, allow down_threshold to take any value from 1 to 99
and fix the related comment.

Fixes: 27ed3cd2ebf4 (cpufreq: conservative: Fix the logic in frequency decrease checking)
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Wilczyński <twilczynski@naver.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: 3.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.10+
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: conservative: Fix comment explaining frequency updates 2016-11-16T22:15:56+00:00 Stratos Karafotis stratosk@semaphore.gr 2016-11-16T19:27:22+00:00 42d951c851f1d08bb12430a7e2e9f4657f7c395c The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong. Both increase and decrease happen at steps. Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
The original comment about the frequency increase to maximum is wrong.

Both increase and decrease happen at steps.

Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>