linux-toradex.git/drivers/cpufreq/davinci-cpufreq.c, branch v3.19.2

cpufreq: drop owner assignment from platform_drivers

2014-10-20T14:20:24+00:00

A platform_driver does not need to set an owner, it will be populated by the
driver core.

Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang

cpufreq: Remove cpufreq_generic_exit()

2014-03-12T00:06:00+00:00

cpufreq_generic_exit() is empty now and can be deleted.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: introduce cpufreq_generic_get() routine

2014-01-17T01:00:44+00:00

CPUFreq drivers that use clock frameworks interface,i.e. clk_get_rate(),
to get CPUs clk rate, have similar sort of code used in most of them.

This patch adds a generic ->get() which will do the same thing for them.
All those drivers are required to now is to set .get to cpufreq_generic_get()
and set their clk pointer in policy->clk during ->init().

Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt 
Acked-by: Shawn Guo 
Acked-by: Linus Walleij 
Acked-by: Shawn Guo 
Acked-by: Stephen Warren 
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: Mark ARM drivers with CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK flag

2014-01-06T13:17:25+00:00

Sometimes boot loaders set CPU frequency to a value outside of frequency table
present with cpufreq core. In such cases CPU might be unstable if it has to run
on that frequency for long duration of time and so its better to set it to a
frequency which is specified in frequency table.

On some systems we can't really say what frequency we're running at the moment
and so for these we shouldn't check if we are running at a frequency present in
frequency table. And so we really can't force this for all the cpufreq drivers.

Hence we are created another flag here: CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK that
will be marked by platforms which want to go for this check at boot time.

Initially this is done for all ARM platforms but others may follow if required.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: move freq change notifications to cpufreq core

2013-10-30T23:11:08+00:00

Most of the drivers do following in their ->target_index() routines:

	struct cpufreq_freqs freqs;
	freqs.old = old freq...
	freqs.new = new freq...

	cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE);

	/* Change rate here */

	cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);

This is replicated over all cpufreq drivers today and there doesn't exists a
good enough reason why this shouldn't be moved to cpufreq core instead.

There are few special cases though, like exynos5440, which doesn't do everything
on the call to ->target_index() routine and call some kind of bottom halves for
doing this work, work/tasklet/etc..

They may continue doing notification from their own code as flag:
CPUFREQ_ASYNC_NOTIFICATION is already set for them.

All drivers are also modified in this patch to avoid breaking 'git bisect', as
double notification would happen otherwise.

Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt 
Acked-by: Jesper Nilsson 
Acked-by: Linus Walleij 
Acked-by: Russell King 
Acked-by: Stephen Warren 
Tested-by: Andrew Lunn 
Tested-by: Nicolas Pitre 
Reviewed-by: Lan Tianyu 
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: Implement light weight ->target_index() routine

2013-10-25T20:42:24+00:00

Currently, the prototype of cpufreq_drivers target routines is:

int target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int target_freq,
		unsigned int relation);

And most of the drivers call cpufreq_frequency_table_target() to get a valid
index of their frequency table which is closest to the target_freq. And they
don't use target_freq and relation after that.

So, it makes sense to just do this work in cpufreq core before calling
cpufreq_frequency_table_target() and simply pass index instead. But this can be
done only with drivers which expose their frequency table with cpufreq core. For
others we need to stick with the old prototype of target() until those drivers
are converted to expose frequency tables.

This patch implements the new light weight prototype for target_index() routine.
It looks like this:

int target_index(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index);

CPUFreq core will call cpufreq_frequency_table_target() before calling this
routine and pass index to it. Because CPUFreq core now requires to call routines
present in freq_table.c CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE must be enabled all the time.

This also marks target() interface as deprecated. So, that new drivers avoid
using it. And Documentation is updated accordingly.

It also converts existing .target() to newly defined light weight
.target_index() routine for many driver.

Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt 
Acked-by: Jesper Nilsson 
Acked-by: Linus Walleij 
Acked-by: Russell King 
Acked-by: David S. Miller 
Tested-by: Andrew Lunn 
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: davinci: use cpufreq_generic_init()

2013-10-15T22:50:33+00:00

Use generic cpufreq_generic_init() routine instead of replicating the same code
here.

Cc: Sekhar Nori 
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: davinci: don't initialize part of policy set by core

2013-10-15T22:50:29+00:00

Many common initializations of struct policy are moved to core now and hence
this driver doesn't need to do it. This patch removes such code.

Most recent of those changes is to call ->get() in the core after calling
->init().

Cc: Sekhar Nori 
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: davinci: Use generic cpufreq routines

2013-10-15T22:50:24+00:00

Most of the CPUFreq drivers do similar things in .exit() and .verify() routines
and .attr. So its better if we have generic routines for them which can be used
by cpufreq drivers then.

This patch uses these generic routines in the davinci driver.

Cc: Sekhar Nori 
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: add new routine cpufreq_verify_within_cpu_limits()

2013-10-15T22:50:23+00:00

Most of the users of cpufreq_verify_within_limits() calls it for
limiting with min/max from policy->cpuinfo. We can make that code
simple by introducing another routine which will do this for them
automatically.

This patch adds another routine cpufreq_verify_within_cpu_limits()
and updates others to use it.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar 
Acked-by: Dirk Brandewie 
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki