RE: [PATCH] cpufreq: imx6q: Disable only available frequencies

From: Christoph Niedermaier
Date: Sat May 13 2023 - 03:27:51 EST


From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marex@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 9:26 PM
> On 5/11/23 11:23, Christoph Niedermaier wrote:
>> In the example in Documentation/power/opp.rst, an availability check
>> is present before disabling a specific frequency. If a frequency isn't
>> available, the warning of a failed disabling of a non-existent
>> frequency is misleading. Therefore, check the availability of the
>> frequency in a separate inline function before disabling it.
>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
>> index 48e1772e98fd..4e2d2bc47aba 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
>> @@ -209,6 +209,21 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver imx6q_cpufreq_driver = {
>> .suspend = cpufreq_generic_suspend,
>> };
>>
>> +static inline int disable_freq_if_available(struct device *dev,
>
> The inline isn't needed, esp. on static function, let the compiler
> figure it out.
>
> Also, "disable if available" should rather be "disable if unavailable" I
> think ?

Here I mean the OPP and I can only disable an available frequency.

>
>> + unsigned long freq)
>> +{
>> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
>> + int ret = 0;
>> +
>> + opp = dev_pm_opp_find_freq_exact(dev, freq, true);
>> + if (!IS_ERR(opp)) {
>> + dev_pm_opp_put(opp);
>> + ret = dev_pm_opp_disable(dev, freq);
>> + }
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> #define OCOTP_CFG3 0x440
>> #define OCOTP_CFG3_SPEED_SHIFT 16
>> #define OCOTP_CFG3_SPEED_1P2GHZ 0x3
>> @@ -254,16 +269,16 @@ static int imx6q_opp_check_speed_grading(struct device *dev)
>> val &= 0x3;
>>
>> if (val < OCOTP_CFG3_SPEED_996MHZ)
>> - if (dev_pm_opp_disable(dev, 996000000))
>> + if (disable_freq_if_available(dev, 996000000))
>> dev_warn(dev, "failed to disable 996MHz OPP\n");
>>
>> if (of_machine_is_compatible("fsl,imx6q") ||
>> of_machine_is_compatible("fsl,imx6qp")) {
>
> Can we introduce a function like:
>
> void imx_disable_freq_if_unavailable(struct device *dev, u32 freq_mhz,
> u32 val, u32 mask)
> {
> if (val == mask)
> return;
> if (!disable_freq_if_available(dev, freq_mhz * 1000000))
> return;
> dev_warn(dev, "failed to disable %dMHz OPP\n", mhz);
> }
>
> And then just call it multiple times in here, to reduce duplication ?
>
>> if (val != OCOTP_CFG3_SPEED_852MHZ)
>> - if (dev_pm_opp_disable(dev, 852000000))
>> + if (disable_freq_if_available(dev, 852000000))
>> dev_warn(dev, "failed to disable 852MHz OPP\n");
>

Yes, using a function to reduce duplications would be good.


Regards
Christoph