Re: [PATCH v5 03/23] PM: EM: Find first CPU active while updating OPP efficiency

[Lukasz Luba]

On 12/28/23 17:13, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 12/19/23 10:53, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > On 12/17/23 17:58, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > > On 11/29/23 11:08, Lukasz Luba 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 active CPU from the Performance Domain. This is
> > > > needed since the first CPU in the cpumask might be offline when we
> > > > run this code path.
> > >
> > > I didn't understand the problem here. It seems you're fixing a race, but the
> > > description is not clear to me what the race is.
> >
> > I have explained that in v1, v4 comments for this patch.
> > When the EM is registered the fist CPU is always online. No problem
> > for the old code, but for new code with runtime modification at
> > later time, potentially from different subsystems - it it (e.g. thermal,
> > drivers, etc). The fist CPU might be offline, but still such EM
> > update for this domain shouldn'y fail. Although, when the CPU is offline
> > we cannot get the valid policy...
> >
> > We can get it for next cpu in the cpumask, that's what the code is
> > doing.
>
> Okay, I can see now that cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() ignores offline CPUs
> intentionally.
>
> A new variant seems better to me. But the experts know better. So LGTM.

Thanks. Yes, I will gently ask Viresh to have a look at those places
cpufreq related places.