[PATCH 1/2] cpufreq-dt: check CPU clock/power domain during initializing
Viresh Kumar
viresh.kumar at linaro.org
Mon Jan 19 00:00:35 PST 2015
On 9 January 2015 at 15:24, pi-cheng.chen <pi-cheng.chen at linaro.org> wrote:
> Currently the DT based cpufreq driver is missing some way to check which
> CPUs share clocks. In the 1st patch, CPU clock/power domain information is
> added to the platform_data of cpufreq-dt so that cpufreq-dt driver could
> check which CPUs share clock/power.
>
> Signed-off-by: pi-cheng.chen <pi-cheng.chen at linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> include/linux/cpufreq-dt.h | 6 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
> index fde97d6..ff8c266 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
> @@ -296,6 +296,21 @@ static int cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> pd = cpufreq_get_driver_data();
> if (!pd || !pd->independent_clocks)
> cpumask_setall(policy->cpus);
> + else if (pd && !list_empty(&pd->domain_list)) {
> + struct list_head *domain_node;
> +
> + list_for_each(domain_node, &pd->domain_list) {
> + struct cpufreq_cpu_domain *domain;
Define this with domain_node.
> +
> + domain = container_of(domain_node,
> + struct cpufreq_cpu_domain, node);
> + if (!cpumask_test_cpu(policy->cpu, &domain->cpus))
> + continue;
> +
> + cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, &domain->cpus);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
>
> of_node_put(np);
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpufreq-dt.h b/include/linux/cpufreq-dt.h
> index 0414009..92bffd3 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpufreq-dt.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpufreq-dt.h
> @@ -10,6 +10,11 @@
> #ifndef __CPUFREQ_DT_H__
> #define __CPUFREQ_DT_H__
>
> +struct cpufreq_cpu_domain {
> + struct list_head node;
> + cpumask_t cpus;
> +};
> +
> struct cpufreq_dt_platform_data {
> /*
> * True when each CPU has its own clock to control its
> @@ -17,6 +22,7 @@ struct cpufreq_dt_platform_data {
> * clock.
> */
> bool independent_clocks;
> + struct list_head domain_list;
> };
Though we need to keep only one of these two, but I don't think
any of these will stay for long time. So, its okay..
Looks fine. Thanks.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list