[PATCH 07/11] PM / devfreq: check get_dev_status before start monitor
Dong Aisheng
dongas86 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 18 08:03:22 GMT 2021
Hi Chanwoo,
On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 2:45 PM Dong Aisheng <dongas86 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 12:09 AM Chanwoo Choi <cwchoi00 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 21. 3. 12. 오후 7:57, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 2:54 PM Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi at samsung.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 3/10/21 1:56 PM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:08 AM Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi at samsung.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 3/10/21 11:56 AM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> > >>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:12 AM Chanwoo Choi <cwchoi00 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 21. 3. 10. 오전 12:58, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 21. 3. 9. 오후 9:58, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> The devfreq monitor depends on the device to provide load information
> > >>>>>>>> by .get_dev_status() to calculate the next target freq.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> And this will cause changing governor to simple ondemand fail
> > >>>>>>>> if device can't support.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong at nxp.com>
> > >>>>>>>> ---
> > >>>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c | 10 +++++++---
> > >>>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor.h | 2 +-
> > >>>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_simpleondemand.c | 3 +--
> > >>>>>>>> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c b/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> > >>>>>>>> index 7231fe6862a2..d1787b6c7d7c 100644
> > >>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> > >>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> > >>>>>>>> @@ -482,10 +482,13 @@ static void devfreq_monitor(struct work_struct
> > >>>>>>>> *work)
> > >>>>>>>> * to be called from governor in response to DEVFREQ_GOV_START
> > >>>>>>>> * event when device is added to devfreq framework.
> > >>>>>>>> */
> > >>>>>>>> -void devfreq_monitor_start(struct devfreq *devfreq)
> > >>>>>>>> +int devfreq_monitor_start(struct devfreq *devfreq)
> > >>>>>>>> {
> > >>>>>>>> if (IS_SUPPORTED_FLAG(devfreq->governor->flags, IRQ_DRIVEN))
> > >>>>>>>> - return;
> > >>>>>>>> + return 0;
> > >>>>>>>> +
> > >>>>>>>> + if (!devfreq->profile->get_dev_status)
> > >>>>>>>> + return -EINVAL;
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Again, I think that get_dev_status is not used for all governors.
> > >>>>>> So that it cause the governor start fail. Don't check whether
> > >>>>>> .get_dev_status is NULL or not.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm not quite understand your point.
> > >>>>> it is used by governor_simpleondemand.c and tegra_devfreq_governor.
> > >>>>> get_target_freq -> devfreq_update_stats -> get_dev_status
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The devfreq can add the new governor by anyone.
> > >>>> So these functions like devfreq_monitor_* have to support
> > >>>> the governors and also must support the governor to be added
> > >>>> in the future.
> > >>>
> > >>> Yes, but devfreq_monitor_* is only used by polling mode, right?
> > >>> The governor using it has to implement get_dev_status unless
> > >>> there's an exception in the future.
> > >>>
> > >>> Currently this patch wants to address the issue that user can switch
> > >>> to ondemand governor (polling mode) by sysfs even devices does
> > >>> not support it (no get_dev_status implemented).
> > >>
> > >> As I commented, I'll fix this issue. If devfreq driver doesn't implement
> > >> the .get_dev_status, don't show it via available_governors. I think that
> > >> it is fundamental solution to fix this issue.
> > >
> > > Sounds good
> > >
> > >> So on this version,
> > >> don't add the this conditional statement on this function
> > >>
> > >
> > > Almost all this patch did is adding a checking for get_dev_status.
> > > So do you mean drop this patch?
> > > I wonder it's still a necessary checking to explicitly tell devfreq monitor
> > > users that get_dev_status is needed during governor startup.
> >
> > I think that the it is enough to check .get_dev_status in
> > devfreq_update_stats. We have to check it on where it is used.
> >
>
> I think the drawback of only checking .get_dev_status in
> devfreq_update_stats is:
> 1. devfreq will still register successfully and ondemand governor starts ok
> 2. ondemand governor will still be shown in sysfs which is something
> you want to fix
> 3. devfreq will end up printing endless error messages in devfreq_monitor worker
> "dvfs failed with (%d) error" as the possible missing .get_dev_status
>
> So i wonder if you don't like changing the common devfreq_monitor_start in order
> to make it look common for all governors, then we probably still need
> to fix it in
> ondemand governor in order to avoid the possible above issues.
>
> static int devfreq_simple_ondemand_handler(struct devfreq *devfreq,
> unsigned int event, void *data)
> {
> switch (event) {
> case DEVFREQ_GOV_START:
> if (!devfreq->profile->get_dev_status)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> return devfreq_monitor_start(devfreq);
> ...
> }
>
> How do you think?
Any feedback?
I'm waiting for your confirmation whether dropping this one,
then I can re-sent the series.
Regards
Aisheng
>
> Regards
> Aisheng
>
>
> > >
> > >> And on next version, please use the capital letter for first character
> > >> on patch title as following:
> > >>
> > >> - PM / devfreq: Check get_dev_status before start monitor
> > >>
> > >
> > > Okay to me.
> > > Thanks for the suggestion.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Aisheng
> > >
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>> Aisheng
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Without checking, device can switch to ondemand governor if it does not support.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Am i missed something?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Regards
> > >>>>> Aisheng
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> switch (devfreq->profile->timer) {
> > >>>>>>>> case DEVFREQ_TIMER_DEFERRABLE:
> > >>>>>>>> @@ -495,12 +498,13 @@ void devfreq_monitor_start(struct devfreq *devfreq)
> > >>>>>>>> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&devfreq->work, devfreq_monitor);
> > >>>>>>>> break;
> > >>>>>>>> default:
> > >>>>>>>> - return;
> > >>>>>>>> + return -EINVAL;
> > >>>>>>>> }
> > >>>>>>>> if (devfreq->profile->polling_ms)
> > >>>>>>>> queue_delayed_work(devfreq_wq, &devfreq->work,
> > >>>>>>>> msecs_to_jiffies(devfreq->profile->polling_ms));
> > >>>>>>>> + return 0;
> > >>>>>>>> }
> > >>>>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(devfreq_monitor_start);
> > >>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor.h b/drivers/devfreq/governor.h
> > >>>>>>>> index 5cee3f64fe2b..31af6d072a10 100644
> > >>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor.h
> > >>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor.h
> > >>>>>>>> @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ struct devfreq_governor {
> > >>>>>>>> unsigned int event, void *data);
> > >>>>>>>> };
> > >>>>>>>> -void devfreq_monitor_start(struct devfreq *devfreq);
> > >>>>>>>> +int devfreq_monitor_start(struct devfreq *devfreq);
> > >>>>>>>> void devfreq_monitor_stop(struct devfreq *devfreq);
> > >>>>>>>> void devfreq_monitor_suspend(struct devfreq *devfreq);
> > >>>>>>>> void devfreq_monitor_resume(struct devfreq *devfreq);
> > >>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_simpleondemand.c
> > >>>>>>>> b/drivers/devfreq/governor_simpleondemand.c
> > >>>>>>>> index d57b82a2b570..ea287b57cbf3 100644
> > >>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_simpleondemand.c
> > >>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_simpleondemand.c
> > >>>>>>>> @@ -89,8 +89,7 @@ static int devfreq_simple_ondemand_handler(struct
> > >>>>>>>> devfreq *devfreq,
> > >>>>>>>> {
> > >>>>>>>> switch (event) {
> > >>>>>>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_START:
> > >>>>>>>> - devfreq_monitor_start(devfreq);
> > >>>>>>>> - break;
> > >>>>>>>> + return devfreq_monitor_start(devfreq);
> > >>>>>>>> case DEVFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > >>>>>>>> devfreq_monitor_stop(devfreq);
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Need to handle the all points of devfreq_monitor_start() usage.
> > >>>>>>> please check the tegra30-devfreq.c for this update.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> $ grep -rn "devfreq_monitor_start" drivers/
> > >>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/governor_simpleondemand.c:92:
> > >>>>>>> devfreq_monitor_start(devfreq);
> > >>>>>>> drivers/devfreq/tegra30-devfreq.c:744:
> > >>>>>>> devfreq_monitor_start(devfreq);
> > >>>>>>> ......
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>>>> Samsung Electronics
> > >>>>>> Chanwoo Choi
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>> Chanwoo Choi
> > >>>> Samsung Electronics
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >> Chanwoo Choi
> > >> Samsung Electronics
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Samsung Electronics
> > Chanwoo Choi
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list