LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
To: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>
Cc: MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
	Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / devfreq: Remove redundant frequency adjustment from governors
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 08:47:05 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180517154705.GN19594@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5AFCDE68.6000804@samsung.com>

Hi,

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:44:08AM +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2018년 05월 17일 06:10, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > The performance, powersave, simpleondemand and userspace governors
> > determine a target frequency and then adjust it according to the
> > df->min/max_freq limits that might have been set by user space. This
> > adjustment is redundant, it is done in update_devfreq() for any
> > governor, right after governor->get_target_freq().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c    | 10 ++--------
> >  drivers/devfreq/governor_powersave.c      |  5 -----
> >  drivers/devfreq/governor_simpleondemand.c |  7 +------
> >  drivers/devfreq/governor_userspace.c      | 16 ++++------------
> >  4 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c
> > index 4d23ecfbd948..31ee30622c00 100644
> > --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c
> > +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c
> > @@ -16,14 +16,8 @@
> >  static int devfreq_performance_func(struct devfreq *df,
> >  				    unsigned long *freq)
> >  {
> > -	/*
> > -	 * target callback should be able to get floor value as
> > -	 * said in devfreq.h
> > -	 */
> > -	if (!df->max_freq)
> > -		*freq = UINT_MAX;
> > -	else
> > -		*freq = df->max_freq;
> > +	*freq = UINT_MAX;
> > +
> 
> It is difficult to understand why use UINT_MAX instead of df->max_freq.
> 
> Instead, after merged the commit ab8f58ad72c4 ("PM / devfreq: Set min/max_freq
> when adding the devfreq device"), df->max/min_freq have the specific frequency
> value always. So, we can change it as following without UINT_MAX. 
> 
> 	*freq = df->max_freq;

There are two reasons why I don't like to return df->max_freq:

1. update_devfreq() already handles the user limits (which is what
min/max_freq actually are), no need to spread parts of this
additionally over all governors.

2. I plan to introduce the concept of a devfreq policy [1], which
would introduce another pair of frequencies, df->policy.min/max, and
min/max_freq would become df->policy.user.min/max. The governors would
then return df->policy.user.min/max, which isn't really incorrect
since update_devfreq() takes care of adjusting the value with
df->policy.min/max if needed, but it also isn't very clear. And we
almost certainly shouldn't additionally handle df->policy.min/max in
the governors.

I agree though that just returning UINT_MAX isn't very clear either,
even though that's what some governors are doing currently when
df->min/max_freq is not set (which can still occur, since user space
is free to set the value to 0).

I think there are two better options than returning df->min/max_freq:

a) create constants DEVFREQ_MIN/MAX_FREQ and return them, this clearly
states the intent.

b) return df->scaling_min/max_freq, which is the min/max frequency
that is actually available on the device side, depending on the
enabled OPPs.

A slightly related question: Is it actually intended to keep
supporting a value of 0 for df->min/max_freq to keep backwards
compatibility, or should the related code be removed?

Thanks

Matthias

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10401999/ (first draft, without
df->policy.min/max)

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-17 15:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CGME20180516211119epcas2p4370ceb0c9d959bd1441fa71493a9b0e0@epcas2p4.samsung.com>
2018-05-16 21:10 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2018-05-17  1:44   ` Chanwoo Choi
2018-05-17 15:47     ` Matthias Kaehlcke [this message]
2018-05-17 23:15       ` Chanwoo Choi
2018-05-18 17:38         ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2018-05-17 22:41   ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2018-05-17 23:18     ` Chanwoo Choi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180517154705.GN19594@google.com \
    --to=mka@chromium.org \
    --cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
    --cc=cw00.choi@samsung.com \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=kyungmin.park@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=myungjoo.ham@samsung.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] PM / devfreq: Remove redundant frequency adjustment from governors' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).