| Message ID | 51374F8D.9040300@semaphore.gr (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 6 March 2013 22:15, Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> wrote: > Use an inline function to evaluate freq_target to avoid duplicate code. > > Also, define a macro for the default frequency step. > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 27 +++++++++++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > index 08be431..3fb921d 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ > /* Conservative governor macros */ > #define DEF_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD (80) > #define DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD (20) > +#define DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP (5) > #define DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR (1) > #define MAX_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR (10) > > @@ -39,9 +40,20 @@ static struct cs_dbs_tuners cs_tuners = { > .down_threshold = DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD, > .sampling_down_factor = DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR, > .ignore_nice = 0, > - .freq_step = 5, > + .freq_step = DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP, > }; > > +static inline unsigned int get_freq_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > +{ > + unsigned int freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; > + > + /* max freq cannot be less than 100. But who knows... */ > + if (unlikely(freq_target == 0)) > + freq_target = DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP; > + > + return freq_target; > +} > + > /* > * Every sampling_rate, we check, if current idle time is less than 20% > * (default), then we try to increase frequency. Every sampling_rate * > @@ -55,7 +67,6 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) > { > struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s *dbs_info = &per_cpu(cs_cpu_dbs_info, cpu); > struct cpufreq_policy *policy = dbs_info->cdbs.cur_policy; > - unsigned int freq_target; > > /* > * break out if we 'cannot' reduce the speed as the user might > @@ -72,13 +83,7 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) > if (dbs_info->requested_freq == policy->max) > return; > > - freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; > - > - /* max freq cannot be less than 100. But who knows.... */ > - if (unlikely(freq_target == 0)) > - freq_target = 5; > - > - dbs_info->requested_freq += freq_target; > + dbs_info->requested_freq += get_freq_target(policy); > if (dbs_info->requested_freq > policy->max) > dbs_info->requested_freq = policy->max; > > @@ -94,9 +99,7 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) > > /* Check for frequency decrease */ > if (load < cs_tuners.down_threshold) { > - freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; > - > - dbs_info->requested_freq -= freq_target; > + dbs_info->requested_freq -= get_freq_target(policy); > if (dbs_info->requested_freq < policy->min) > dbs_info->requested_freq = policy->min; > > -- > 1.8.1.4 > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> On 6 March 2013 22:15, Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> wrote: >> Use an inline function to evaluate freq_target to avoid duplicate code. >> >> Also, define a macro for the default frequency step. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> >> --- >> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 27 +++++++++++++++------------ >> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Hi Rafael, Could you please let me know if this patchset is going to be applied or not? Thank you in advance for your time, Stratos -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wednesday, March 06, 2013 04:15:41 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote: > On 03/06/2013 03:23 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > Atleast my poor mind can't make out how. To me it looks like broken now. > > > > > > When can we enter this "if" block, probably only in case where max freq is > > less than 100 KHz (And because we have freq unit in KHz in cpufreq, its exact > > value is less than 100). Lets say its 90. > > > > So, we will get into your "if" block now and would set freq_target to 90 - 5000. > > > > So its broken, isn't it. > > > > Rest is fine. > > > > Of course your are right. I'm sorry for this confusion. > > Below v2 of this patch. > > Thanks, > Stratos > > --------------------------------8<------------------------ > Use an inline function to evaluate freq_target to avoid duplicate code. > > Also, define a macro for the default frequency step. > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> This one didn't apply for me to linux-pm.git/bleeding-edge. Care to rebase? Rafael > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 27 +++++++++++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > index 08be431..3fb921d 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ > /* Conservative governor macros */ > #define DEF_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD (80) > #define DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD (20) > +#define DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP (5) > #define DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR (1) > #define MAX_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR (10) > > @@ -39,9 +40,20 @@ static struct cs_dbs_tuners cs_tuners = { > .down_threshold = DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD, > .sampling_down_factor = DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR, > .ignore_nice = 0, > - .freq_step = 5, > + .freq_step = DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP, > }; > > +static inline unsigned int get_freq_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > +{ > + unsigned int freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; > + > + /* max freq cannot be less than 100. But who knows... */ > + if (unlikely(freq_target == 0)) > + freq_target = DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP; > + > + return freq_target; > +} > + > /* > * Every sampling_rate, we check, if current idle time is less than 20% > * (default), then we try to increase frequency. Every sampling_rate * > @@ -55,7 +67,6 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) > { > struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s *dbs_info = &per_cpu(cs_cpu_dbs_info, cpu); > struct cpufreq_policy *policy = dbs_info->cdbs.cur_policy; > - unsigned int freq_target; > > /* > * break out if we 'cannot' reduce the speed as the user might > @@ -72,13 +83,7 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) > if (dbs_info->requested_freq == policy->max) > return; > > - freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; > - > - /* max freq cannot be less than 100. But who knows.... */ > - if (unlikely(freq_target == 0)) > - freq_target = 5; > - > - dbs_info->requested_freq += freq_target; > + dbs_info->requested_freq += get_freq_target(policy); > if (dbs_info->requested_freq > policy->max) > dbs_info->requested_freq = policy->max; > > @@ -94,9 +99,7 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) > > /* Check for frequency decrease */ > if (load < cs_tuners.down_threshold) { > - freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; > - > - dbs_info->requested_freq -= freq_target; > + dbs_info->requested_freq -= get_freq_target(policy); > if (dbs_info->requested_freq < policy->min) > dbs_info->requested_freq = policy->min; > >
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c index 08be431..3fb921d 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ /* Conservative governor macros */ #define DEF_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD (80) #define DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD (20) +#define DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP (5) #define DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR (1) #define MAX_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR (10) @@ -39,9 +40,20 @@ static struct cs_dbs_tuners cs_tuners = { .down_threshold = DEF_FREQUENCY_DOWN_THRESHOLD, .sampling_down_factor = DEF_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR, .ignore_nice = 0, - .freq_step = 5, + .freq_step = DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP, }; +static inline unsigned int get_freq_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) +{ + unsigned int freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; + + /* max freq cannot be less than 100. But who knows... */ + if (unlikely(freq_target == 0)) + freq_target = DEF_FREQUENCY_STEP; + + return freq_target; +} + /* * Every sampling_rate, we check, if current idle time is less than 20% * (default), then we try to increase frequency. Every sampling_rate * @@ -55,7 +67,6 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) { struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s *dbs_info = &per_cpu(cs_cpu_dbs_info, cpu); struct cpufreq_policy *policy = dbs_info->cdbs.cur_policy; - unsigned int freq_target; /* * break out if we 'cannot' reduce the speed as the user might @@ -72,13 +83,7 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) if (dbs_info->requested_freq == policy->max) return; - freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; - - /* max freq cannot be less than 100. But who knows.... */ - if (unlikely(freq_target == 0)) - freq_target = 5; - - dbs_info->requested_freq += freq_target; + dbs_info->requested_freq += get_freq_target(policy); if (dbs_info->requested_freq > policy->max) dbs_info->requested_freq = policy->max; @@ -94,9 +99,7 @@ static void cs_check_cpu(int cpu, unsigned int load) /* Check for frequency decrease */ if (load < cs_tuners.down_threshold) { - freq_target = (cs_tuners.freq_step * policy->max) / 100; - - dbs_info->requested_freq -= freq_target; + dbs_info->requested_freq -= get_freq_target(policy); if (dbs_info->requested_freq < policy->min) dbs_info->requested_freq = policy->min;