Hi Taniya,
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 01:37:28PM +0530, Taniya Das wrote:
Add support to read the voltage look up table and populate OPP for all
corresponding CPUS for consumers like the energy model could use the
frequency and voltage from the OPP tables.
Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <m...@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <t...@codeaurora.org>
---
drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
index d83939a..18f90bb 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
@@ -10,18 +10,21 @@
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/of_address.h>
#include <linux/of_platform.h>
+#include <linux/pm_opp.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#define LUT_MAX_ENTRIES 40U
#define LUT_SRC GENMASK(31, 30)
#define LUT_L_VAL GENMASK(7, 0)
#define LUT_CORE_COUNT GENMASK(18, 16)
+#define LUT_VOLT GENMASK(11, 0)
#define LUT_ROW_SIZE 32
#define CLK_HW_DIV 2
/* Register offsets */
#define REG_ENABLE 0x0
-#define REG_LUT_TABLE 0x110
+#define REG_FREQ_LUT 0x110
+#define REG_VOLT_LUT 0x114
#define REG_PERF_STATE 0x920
static unsigned long cpu_hw_rate, xo_rate;
@@ -75,6 +78,7 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(struct device *dev,
void __iomem *base)
{
u32 data, src, lval, i, core_count, prev_cc = 0, prev_freq = 0, freq;
+ u32 volt;
unsigned int max_cores = cpumask_weight(policy->cpus);
struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table;
@@ -83,11 +87,16 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(struct device *dev,
return -ENOMEM;
for (i = 0; i < LUT_MAX_ENTRIES; i++) {
- data = readl_relaxed(base + REG_LUT_TABLE + i * LUT_ROW_SIZE);
+ data = readl_relaxed(base + REG_FREQ_LUT +
+ i * LUT_ROW_SIZE);
src = FIELD_GET(LUT_SRC, data);
lval = FIELD_GET(LUT_L_VAL, data);
core_count = FIELD_GET(LUT_CORE_COUNT, data);
+ data = readl_relaxed(base + REG_VOLT_LUT +
+ i * LUT_ROW_SIZE);
+ volt = FIELD_GET(LUT_VOLT, data) * 1000;
+
if (src)
freq = xo_rate * lval / 1000;
else
@@ -98,6 +107,8 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(struct device *dev,
table[i].frequency = CPUFREQ_ENTRY_INVALID;
} else {
table[i].frequency = freq;
+ dev_pm_opp_add(get_cpu_device(policy->cpu),
+ freq * 1000, volt);
dev_dbg(dev, "index=%d freq=%d, core_count %d\n", i,
freq, core_count);
}
@@ -116,6 +127,8 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(struct device *dev,
if (prev_cc != max_cores) {
prev->frequency = prev_freq;
prev->flags = CPUFREQ_BOOST_FREQ;
+ dev_pm_opp_add(get_cpu_device(policy->cpu),
+ prev_freq * 1000, volt);
}
break;
@@ -127,6 +140,7 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(struct device *dev,
table[i].frequency = CPUFREQ_TABLE_END;
policy->freq_table = table;
+ dev_pm_opp_set_sharing_cpus(get_cpu_device(policy->cpu), policy->cpus);
return 0;
}
@@ -159,10 +173,18 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy
*policy)
struct device *dev = &global_pdev->dev;
struct of_phandle_args args;
struct device_node *cpu_np;
+ struct device *cpu_dev;
struct resource *res;
void __iomem *base;
int ret, index;
+ cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(policy->cpu);
+ if (!cpu_dev) {
+ pr_err("%s: failed to get cpu%d device\n", __func__,
+ policy->cpu);
+ return -ENODEV;
+ }
+
cpu_np = of_cpu_device_node_get(policy->cpu);
if (!cpu_np)
return -EINVAL;
@@ -205,6 +227,12 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy
*policy)
goto error;
}
+ ret = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_count(cpu_dev);
+ if (ret <= 0) {
+ dev_err(cpu_dev, "OPP table is not ready\n");
+ goto error;
+ }
+
policy->fast_switch_possible = true;
return 0;
@@ -217,6 +245,7 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_exit(struct cpufreq_policy
*policy)
{
void __iomem *base = policy->driver_data - REG_PERF_STATE;
+ dev_pm_opp_remove_all_dynamic(&global_pdev->dev);
kfree(policy->freq_table);
devm_iounmap(&global_pdev->dev, base);
With this patch I get the following message on a SDM845 platform:
[ 0.847515] cpu cpu0: _opp_is_duplicate: duplicate OPPs detected. Existing:
freq: 1766400000, volt: 804000, enabled: 1. New: freq: 1766400000, volt:
804000, enabled: 1
A LUT that doesn't end with a boost frequency isn't handled
properly. The below patch fixes this.
Cheers
Matthias
From 481d7d6b190285c95f20e9e1b5ccd5c6b9910a0d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matthias Kaehlcke <m...@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 15:54:54 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Don't add duplicate OPPs
Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <m...@chromium.org>
---
drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
index 41557329777e5a..314c8d29276b5e 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
@@ -103,15 +103,14 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(struct device *dev,
else
freq = cpu_hw_rate / 1000;
- /* Ignore boosts in the middle of the table */
- if (core_count != max_cores) {
- table[i].frequency = CPUFREQ_ENTRY_INVALID;
- } else {
+ if ((freq != prev_freq) && (core_count == max_cores)) {
table[i].frequency = freq;
dev_pm_opp_add(get_cpu_device(policy->cpu),
- freq * 1000, volt);
+ freq * 1000, volt);
dev_dbg(dev, "index=%d freq=%d, core_count %d\n", i,
freq, core_count);
+ } else {
+ table[i].frequency = CPUFREQ_ENTRY_INVALID;
}
/*
