Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-fw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq FW driver

2018-07-12 Thread Taniya Das

Please help review of the new series[v5] which takes care of the below.

- Remove mapping different register regions of perf/lut/enable,
  instead map the entire HW region.
- Add reg_offset/cpufreq_qcom_std_offsets to be supplied as device data.
- Check of src == 0 during lut read.
- Add of_node_put(cpu_np) in qcom_get_related_cpus
- Update the qcom_cpu_resources_init for register offset data,
  and cleanup the related cpus to keep a single copy of CPUfreq.
- Replace FW with HW, update Kconfig, rename filename qcom-cpufreq-hw.c

On 7/12/2018 2:07 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:

Hi,

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 04:32:35PM +0530, Taniya Das wrote:

The CPUfreq FW present in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps necessary
for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver implements the cpufreq
driver interface for this firmware.

Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan 
Signed-off-by: Taniya Das 
---
  drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm   |   9 +
  drivers/cpufreq/Makefile  |   1 +
  drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c | 336 ++
  3 files changed, 346 insertions(+)
  create mode 100644 drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
index 52f5f1a..2683716 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
@@ -312,3 +312,12 @@ config ARM_PXA2xx_CPUFREQ
  This add the CPUFreq driver support for Intel PXA2xx SOCs.

  If in doubt, say N.
+
+config ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW
+   bool "QCOM CPUFreq FW driver"
+   help
+Support for the CPUFreq FW driver.
+The CPUfreq FW preset in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps
+necessary for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver
+implements the cpufreq driver interface for this firmware.
+Say Y if you want to support CPUFreq FW.
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
index fb4a2ec..34691a2 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
@@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA124_CPUFREQ)+= tegra124-cpufreq.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA186_CPUFREQ)+= tegra186-cpufreq.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TI_CPUFREQ)  += ti-cpufreq.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VEXPRESS_SPC_CPUFREQ)+= vexpress-spc-cpufreq.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW)  += qcom-cpufreq-fw.o


  
##
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c 
b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..62f4452
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c
@@ -0,0 +1,336 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * Copyright (c) 2018, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
+ */
+
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+
+#define INIT_RATE  3UL
+#define XO_RATE1920UL
+#define LUT_MAX_ENTRIES40U
+#define CORE_COUNT_VAL(val)(((val) & (GENMASK(18, 16))) >> 16)
+#define LUT_ROW_SIZE   32
+
+struct cpufreq_qcom {
+   struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table;
+   struct device *dev;
+   void __iomem *perf_base;
+   void __iomem *lut_base;
+   cpumask_t related_cpus;
+   unsigned int max_cores;


Why *max*_cores? This seems to be the number of CPUs in a cluster and
qcom_read_lut() expects the core count read from the LUT to match
exactly.


+static int qcom_read_lut(struct platform_device *pdev,
+struct cpufreq_qcom *c)
+{
+   struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
+   u32 data, src, lval, i, core_count, prev_cc, prev_freq, cur_freq;
+
+   c->table = devm_kcalloc(dev, LUT_MAX_ENTRIES + 1,
+   sizeof(*c->table), GFP_KERNEL);
+   if (!c->table)
+   return -ENOMEM;
+
+   for (i = 0; i < LUT_MAX_ENTRIES; i++) {
+   data = readl_relaxed(c->lut_base + i * LUT_ROW_SIZE);
+   src = ((data & GENMASK(31, 30)) >> 30);
+   lval = (data & GENMASK(7, 0));
+   core_count = CORE_COUNT_VAL(data);
+
+   if (!src)
+   c->table[i].frequency = INIT_RATE / 1000;
+   else
+   c->table[i].frequency = XO_RATE * lval / 1000;


nit: any particular reason to use negative logic here? Why not check
for 'src[ != NULL]', which also seems to be the more common case.


+static int qcom_get_related_cpus(struct device_node *np, struct cpumask *m)
+{
+   struct device_node *cpu_np, *freq_np;
+   int cpu;
+
+   for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
+   cpu_np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
+   if (!cpu_np)
+   continue;
+   freq_np = of_parse_phandle(cpu_np, "qcom,freq-domain", 0);
+   if (!freq_np)
+   continue;
+   if (freq_np == np)
+   cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, m);


mi

Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-fw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq FW driver

2018-07-11 Thread Matthias Kaehlcke
Hi,

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 04:32:35PM +0530, Taniya Das wrote:
> The CPUfreq FW present in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps necessary
> for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver implements the cpufreq
> driver interface for this firmware.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan 
> Signed-off-by: Taniya Das 
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm   |   9 +
>  drivers/cpufreq/Makefile  |   1 +
>  drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c | 336 
> ++
>  3 files changed, 346 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> index 52f5f1a..2683716 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> @@ -312,3 +312,12 @@ config ARM_PXA2xx_CPUFREQ
> This add the CPUFreq driver support for Intel PXA2xx SOCs.
> 
> If in doubt, say N.
> +
> +config ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW
> + bool "QCOM CPUFreq FW driver"
> + help
> +  Support for the CPUFreq FW driver.
> +  The CPUfreq FW preset in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps
> +  necessary for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver
> +  implements the cpufreq driver interface for this firmware.
> +  Say Y if you want to support CPUFreq FW.
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> index fb4a2ec..34691a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> @@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA124_CPUFREQ)  += tegra124-cpufreq.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA186_CPUFREQ)   += tegra186-cpufreq.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TI_CPUFREQ) += ti-cpufreq.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VEXPRESS_SPC_CPUFREQ)   += vexpress-spc-cpufreq.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW)+= qcom-cpufreq-fw.o
> 
> 
>  
> ##
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c 
> b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..62f4452
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,336 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2018, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
> + */
> +
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +
> +#define INIT_RATE3UL
> +#define XO_RATE  1920UL
> +#define LUT_MAX_ENTRIES  40U
> +#define CORE_COUNT_VAL(val)  (((val) & (GENMASK(18, 16))) >> 16)
> +#define LUT_ROW_SIZE 32
> +
> +struct cpufreq_qcom {
> + struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table;
> + struct device *dev;
> + void __iomem *perf_base;
> + void __iomem *lut_base;
> + cpumask_t related_cpus;
> + unsigned int max_cores;

Why *max*_cores? This seems to be the number of CPUs in a cluster and
qcom_read_lut() expects the core count read from the LUT to match
exactly.

> +static int qcom_read_lut(struct platform_device *pdev,
> +  struct cpufreq_qcom *c)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + u32 data, src, lval, i, core_count, prev_cc, prev_freq, cur_freq;
> +
> + c->table = devm_kcalloc(dev, LUT_MAX_ENTRIES + 1,
> + sizeof(*c->table), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!c->table)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < LUT_MAX_ENTRIES; i++) {
> + data = readl_relaxed(c->lut_base + i * LUT_ROW_SIZE);
> + src = ((data & GENMASK(31, 30)) >> 30);
> + lval = (data & GENMASK(7, 0));
> + core_count = CORE_COUNT_VAL(data);
> +
> + if (!src)
> + c->table[i].frequency = INIT_RATE / 1000;
> + else
> + c->table[i].frequency = XO_RATE * lval / 1000;

nit: any particular reason to use negative logic here? Why not check
for 'src[ != NULL]', which also seems to be the more common case.

> +static int qcom_get_related_cpus(struct device_node *np, struct cpumask *m)
> +{
> + struct device_node *cpu_np, *freq_np;
> + int cpu;
> +
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + cpu_np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
> + if (!cpu_np)
> + continue;
> + freq_np = of_parse_phandle(cpu_np, "qcom,freq-domain", 0);
> + if (!freq_np)
> + continue;
> + if (freq_np == np)
> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, m);

missing 'of_node_put(cpu_np)'. You might want to do it at the end of
the loop and use a 'goto' above instead of 'continue'.

> +static int qcom_cpu_resources_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
> +struct device_node *np, unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> + struct cpufreq_qcom *c;
> + struct resource res;
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + void __iomem *en_base;
> + int index, ret;
> +
> + c = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*c), G

Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-fw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq FW driver

2018-06-19 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 12-06-18, 16:32, Taniya Das wrote:
> +static int qcom_get_related_cpus(struct device_node *np, struct cpumask *m)
> +{
> + struct device_node *cpu_np, *freq_np;
> + int cpu;
> +
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + cpu_np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
> + if (!cpu_np)
> + continue;
> + freq_np = of_parse_phandle(cpu_np, "qcom,freq-domain", 0);
> + if (!freq_np)
> + continue;
> + if (freq_np == np)
> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, m);
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int qcom_cpu_resources_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
> +struct device_node *np, unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> + struct cpufreq_qcom *c;
> + struct resource res;
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + void __iomem *en_base;
> + int index, ret;
> +
> + c = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*c), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!c)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + index = of_property_match_string(np, "reg-names", "enable");
> + if (index < 0)
> + return index;
> +
> + if (of_address_to_resource(np, index, &res))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + en_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res.start, resource_size(&res));
> + if (!en_base) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to map %s enable-base\n", np->name);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
> + /* FW should be in enabled state to proceed */
> + if (!(readl_relaxed(en_base) & 0x1)) {
> + dev_err(dev, "%s firmware not enabled\n", np->name);
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> + devm_iounmap(&pdev->dev, en_base);
> +
> + index = of_property_match_string(np, "reg-names", "perf");
> + if (index < 0)
> + return index;
> +
> + if (of_address_to_resource(np, index, &res))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + c->perf_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res.start, resource_size(&res));
> + if (!c->perf_base) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to map %s perf-base\n", np->name);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
> + index = of_property_match_string(np, "reg-names", "lut");
> + if (index < 0)
> + return index;
> +
> + if (of_address_to_resource(np, index, &res))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + c->lut_base = devm_ioremap(dev, res.start, resource_size(&res));
> + if (!c->lut_base) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to map %s lut-base\n", np->name);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
> + ret = qcom_get_related_cpus(np, &c->related_cpus);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "%s failed to get related CPUs\n", np->name);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + c->max_cores = cpumask_weight(&c->related_cpus);
> + if (!c->max_cores)
> + return -ENOENT;
> +
> + ret = qcom_read_lut(pdev, c);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "%s failed to read LUT\n", np->name);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + qcom_freq_domain_map[cpu] = c;

This still looks wrong. You have removed the for-each-cpu loop here, so what
will happen now is that you will allocate a different "struct cpufreq_qcom" for
every CPU, even if they are related. Is that what you should be doing ? I think
there should still be a single copy of that structure which must be used by all
related CPUs.

> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int qcom_resources_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct device_node *np, *cpu_np;
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + int ret;
> +
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + cpu_np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
> + if (!cpu_np) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get cpu %d device\n",
> + cpu);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + np = of_parse_phandle(cpu_np, "qcom,freq-domain", 0);
> + if (!np) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get freq-domain 
> device\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + of_node_put(cpu_np);
> +
> + ret = qcom_cpu_resources_init(pdev, np, cpu);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}

-- 
viresh


Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-fw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq FW driver

2018-06-15 Thread Amit Kucheria
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 2:02 PM, Taniya Das  wrote:
> The CPUfreq FW present in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps necessary
> for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver implements the cpufreq
> driver interface for this firmware.
>
> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan 
> Signed-off-by: Taniya Das 
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm   |   9 +
>  drivers/cpufreq/Makefile  |   1 +
>  drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c | 336 
> ++
>  3 files changed, 346 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> index 52f5f1a..2683716 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> @@ -312,3 +312,12 @@ config ARM_PXA2xx_CPUFREQ
>   This add the CPUFreq driver support for Intel PXA2xx SOCs.
>
>   If in doubt, say N.
> +
> +config ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW
> +   bool "QCOM CPUFreq FW driver"
> +   help
> +Support for the CPUFreq FW driver.
> +The CPUfreq FW preset in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps

s/preset/present

> +necessary for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver

I'd rephrase this a bit to address Sudeep's comment. Something like:

"Some QCOM chipsets have a HW engine to offload the steps necessary
for changing the frequency of the CPUs. Firmware loaded in this engine
exposes a programming interface to the high-level OS. This driver
exposes a cpufreq abstraction for this HW engine. Say Y ."

> +implements the cpufreq driver interface for this firmware.
> +Say Y if you want to support CPUFreq FW.
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> index fb4a2ec..34691a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> @@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA124_CPUFREQ)+= tegra124-cpufreq.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA186_CPUFREQ) += tegra186-cpufreq.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TI_CPUFREQ)   += ti-cpufreq.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VEXPRESS_SPC_CPUFREQ) += vexpress-spc-cpufreq.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW)  += qcom-cpufreq-fw.o
>



> +static const struct of_device_id match_table[] = {
> +   { .compatible = "qcom,cpufreq-fw" },
> +   {}
> +};
> +
> +static struct platform_driver qcom_cpufreq_fw_driver = {
> +   .probe = qcom_cpufreq_fw_driver_probe,
> +   .driver = {
> +   .name = "qcom-cpufreq-fw",
> +   .of_match_table = match_table,
> +   .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> +   },
> +};
> +
> +static int __init qcom_cpufreq_fw_init(void)
> +{
> +   return platform_driver_register(&qcom_cpufreq_fw_driver);
> +}
> +subsys_initcall(qcom_cpufreq_fw_init);
> +
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("QCOM CPU Frequency FW");

This can be a bit more descriptive, e.g.

"QCOM firmware-based CPU Frequency  driver"

> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> --
> Qualcomm INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.is a member
> of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by the  Linux Foundation.
>


[PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-fw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq FW driver

2018-06-12 Thread Taniya Das
The CPUfreq FW present in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps necessary
for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver implements the cpufreq
driver interface for this firmware.

Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan 
Signed-off-by: Taniya Das 
---
 drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm   |   9 +
 drivers/cpufreq/Makefile  |   1 +
 drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c | 336 ++
 3 files changed, 346 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
index 52f5f1a..2683716 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
@@ -312,3 +312,12 @@ config ARM_PXA2xx_CPUFREQ
  This add the CPUFreq driver support for Intel PXA2xx SOCs.

  If in doubt, say N.
+
+config ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW
+   bool "QCOM CPUFreq FW driver"
+   help
+Support for the CPUFreq FW driver.
+The CPUfreq FW preset in some QCOM chipsets offloads the steps
+necessary for changing the frequency of CPUs. The driver
+implements the cpufreq driver interface for this firmware.
+Say Y if you want to support CPUFreq FW.
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
index fb4a2ec..34691a2 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
@@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA124_CPUFREQ)+= tegra124-cpufreq.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TEGRA186_CPUFREQ) += tegra186-cpufreq.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_TI_CPUFREQ)   += ti-cpufreq.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_VEXPRESS_SPC_CPUFREQ) += vexpress-spc-cpufreq.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUFREQ_FW)  += qcom-cpufreq-fw.o


 
##
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c 
b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..62f4452
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-fw.c
@@ -0,0 +1,336 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * Copyright (c) 2018, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
+ */
+
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+#include 
+
+#define INIT_RATE  3UL
+#define XO_RATE1920UL
+#define LUT_MAX_ENTRIES40U
+#define CORE_COUNT_VAL(val)(((val) & (GENMASK(18, 16))) >> 16)
+#define LUT_ROW_SIZE   32
+
+struct cpufreq_qcom {
+   struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table;
+   struct device *dev;
+   void __iomem *perf_base;
+   void __iomem *lut_base;
+   cpumask_t related_cpus;
+   unsigned int max_cores;
+};
+
+static struct cpufreq_qcom *qcom_freq_domain_map[NR_CPUS];
+
+static int
+qcom_cpufreq_fw_target_index(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
+unsigned int index)
+{
+   struct cpufreq_qcom *c = policy->driver_data;
+
+   writel_relaxed(index, c->perf_base);
+
+   return 0;
+}
+
+static unsigned int qcom_cpufreq_fw_get(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+   struct cpufreq_qcom *c;
+   struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
+   unsigned int index;
+
+   policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
+   if (!policy)
+   return 0;
+
+   c = policy->driver_data;
+
+   index = readl_relaxed(c->perf_base);
+   index = min(index, LUT_MAX_ENTRIES - 1);
+
+   return policy->freq_table[index].frequency;
+}
+
+static unsigned int
+qcom_cpufreq_fw_fast_switch(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
+   unsigned int target_freq)
+{
+   struct cpufreq_qcom *c = policy->driver_data;
+   int index;
+
+   index = cpufreq_table_find_index_l(policy, target_freq);
+   if (index < 0)
+   return 0;
+
+   writel_relaxed(index, c->perf_base);
+
+   return policy->freq_table[index].frequency;
+}
+
+static int qcom_cpufreq_fw_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
+{
+   struct cpufreq_qcom *c;
+
+   c = qcom_freq_domain_map[policy->cpu];
+   if (!c) {
+   pr_err("No scaling support for CPU%d\n", policy->cpu);
+   return -ENODEV;
+   }
+
+   cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, &c->related_cpus);
+
+   policy->fast_switch_possible = true;
+   policy->freq_table = c->table;
+   policy->driver_data = c;
+
+   return 0;
+}
+
+static struct freq_attr *qcom_cpufreq_fw_attr[] = {
+   &cpufreq_freq_attr_scaling_available_freqs,
+   &cpufreq_freq_attr_scaling_boost_freqs,
+   NULL
+};
+
+static struct cpufreq_driver cpufreq_qcom_fw_driver = {
+   .flags  = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK |
+ CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY,
+   .verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
+   .target_index   = qcom_cpufreq_fw_target_index,
+   .get= qcom_cpufreq_fw_get,
+   .init   = qcom_cpufreq_fw_cpu_init,
+   .fast_switch= qcom_cpufreq_fw_fast_switch,
+   .name