Re: [PATCH v4 03/18] PM: EM: Find first CPU online while updating OPP efficiency

From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Tue Sep 26 2023 - 14:32:48 EST


On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 10:11 AM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The Energy Model might be updated at runtime and the energy efficiency
> for each OPP may change. Thus, there is a need to update also the
> cpufreq framework and make it aligned to the new values. In order to
> do that, use a first online CPU from the Performance Domain.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/power/energy_model.c | 11 +++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/power/energy_model.c b/kernel/power/energy_model.c
> index 42486674b834..3dafdd7731c4 100644
> --- a/kernel/power/energy_model.c
> +++ b/kernel/power/energy_model.c
> @@ -243,12 +243,19 @@ em_cpufreq_update_efficiencies(struct device *dev, struct em_perf_state *table)
> struct em_perf_domain *pd = dev->em_pd;
> struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> int found = 0;
> - int i;
> + int i, cpu;
>
> if (!_is_cpu_device(dev) || !pd)
> return;
>
> - policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpumask_first(em_span_cpus(pd)));
> + /* Try to get a CPU which is online and in this PD */
> + cpu = cpumask_first_and(em_span_cpus(pd), cpu_active_mask);

The comment talks about "online" and cpu_active_mask is used. Isn't
it a bit inconsistent?

> + if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) {
> + dev_warn(dev, "EM: No online CPU for CPUFreq policy\n");
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> if (!policy) {
> dev_warn(dev, "EM: Access to CPUFreq policy failed\n");
> return;
> --
> 2.25.1
>