21 Dec, 2016

1 commit

  • s3c64xx_cpufreq_config_regulator is incorrectly annotated
    as __init, since the caller is also not init:

    WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x92fe1c): Section mismatch in reference from the function s3c64xx_cpufreq_driver_init() to the function .init.text:s3c64xx_cpufreq_config_regulator()

    With modern gcc versions, the function gets inline, so we don't
    see the warning, this only happens with gcc-4.6 and older.

    Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann
    Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Arnd Bergmann
     

30 Apr, 2014

1 commit


07 Apr, 2014

1 commit

  • Currently cpufreq frequency table has two fields: frequency and driver_data.
    driver_data is only for drivers' internal use and cpufreq core shouldn't use
    it at all. But with the introduction of BOOST frequencies, this assumption
    was broken and we started using it as a flag instead.

    There are two problems due to this:
    - It is against the description of this field, as driver's data is used by
    the core now.
    - if drivers fill it with -3 for any frequency, then those frequencies are
    never considered by cpufreq core as it is exactly same as value of
    CPUFREQ_BOOST_FREQ, i.e. ~2.

    The best way to get this fixed is by creating another field flags which
    will be used for such flags. This patch does that. Along with that various
    drivers need modifications due to the change of struct cpufreq_frequency_table.

    Reviewed-by: Gautham R Shenoy
    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     

17 Jan, 2014

1 commit

  • CPUFreq drivers that use clock frameworks interface,i.e. clk_get_rate(),
    to get CPUs clk rate, have similar sort of code used in most of them.

    This patch adds a generic ->get() which will do the same thing for them.
    All those drivers are required to now is to set .get to cpufreq_generic_get()
    and set their clk pointer in policy->clk during ->init().

    Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt
    Acked-by: Shawn Guo
    Acked-by: Linus Walleij
    Acked-by: Shawn Guo
    Acked-by: Stephen Warren
    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     

06 Jan, 2014

1 commit

  • Sometimes boot loaders set CPU frequency to a value outside of frequency table
    present with cpufreq core. In such cases CPU might be unstable if it has to run
    on that frequency for long duration of time and so its better to set it to a
    frequency which is specified in frequency table.

    On some systems we can't really say what frequency we're running at the moment
    and so for these we shouldn't check if we are running at a frequency present in
    frequency table. And so we really can't force this for all the cpufreq drivers.

    Hence we are created another flag here: CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK that
    will be marked by platforms which want to go for this check at boot time.

    Initially this is done for all ARM platforms but others may follow if required.

    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     

31 Oct, 2013

1 commit

  • Most of the drivers do following in their ->target_index() routines:

    struct cpufreq_freqs freqs;
    freqs.old = old freq...
    freqs.new = new freq...

    cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE);

    /* Change rate here */

    cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);

    This is replicated over all cpufreq drivers today and there doesn't exists a
    good enough reason why this shouldn't be moved to cpufreq core instead.

    There are few special cases though, like exynos5440, which doesn't do everything
    on the call to ->target_index() routine and call some kind of bottom halves for
    doing this work, work/tasklet/etc..

    They may continue doing notification from their own code as flag:
    CPUFREQ_ASYNC_NOTIFICATION is already set for them.

    All drivers are also modified in this patch to avoid breaking 'git bisect', as
    double notification would happen otherwise.

    Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt
    Acked-by: Jesper Nilsson
    Acked-by: Linus Walleij
    Acked-by: Russell King
    Acked-by: Stephen Warren
    Tested-by: Andrew Lunn
    Tested-by: Nicolas Pitre
    Reviewed-by: Lan Tianyu
    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     

26 Oct, 2013

2 commits

  • Currently, the prototype of cpufreq_drivers target routines is:

    int target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int target_freq,
    unsigned int relation);

    And most of the drivers call cpufreq_frequency_table_target() to get a valid
    index of their frequency table which is closest to the target_freq. And they
    don't use target_freq and relation after that.

    So, it makes sense to just do this work in cpufreq core before calling
    cpufreq_frequency_table_target() and simply pass index instead. But this can be
    done only with drivers which expose their frequency table with cpufreq core. For
    others we need to stick with the old prototype of target() until those drivers
    are converted to expose frequency tables.

    This patch implements the new light weight prototype for target_index() routine.
    It looks like this:

    int target_index(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index);

    CPUFreq core will call cpufreq_frequency_table_target() before calling this
    routine and pass index to it. Because CPUFreq core now requires to call routines
    present in freq_table.c CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE must be enabled all the time.

    This also marks target() interface as deprecated. So, that new drivers avoid
    using it. And Documentation is updated accordingly.

    It also converts existing .target() to newly defined light weight
    .target_index() routine for many driver.

    Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt
    Acked-by: Jesper Nilsson
    Acked-by: Linus Walleij
    Acked-by: Russell King
    Acked-by: David S. Miller
    Tested-by: Andrew Lunn
    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     
  • Conflicts:
    drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c

    Rafael J. Wysocki
     

17 Oct, 2013

1 commit

  • The index field of cpufreq_frequency_table has been renamed to
    driver_data by commit 5070158 (cpufreq: rename index as driver_data
    in cpufreq_frequency_table).

    This patch updates the s3c64xx driver to match.

    Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax
    Cc: 3.11+ # 3.11+
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Charles Keepax
     

16 Oct, 2013

3 commits


01 Oct, 2013

2 commits


10 Aug, 2013

1 commit


28 Jun, 2013

1 commit

  • * pm-cpufreq-arm:
    cpufreq: tegra: call CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notfier in error cases
    cpufreq: s3c64xx: call CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notfier in error cases
    cpufreq: omap: call CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notfier in error cases
    cpufreq: imx6q: call CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notfier in error cases
    cpufreq: exynos: call CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notfier in error cases
    cpufreq: dbx500: call CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notfier in error cases
    cpufreq: davinci: call CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notfier in error cases
    cpufreq: arm-big-little: call CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notfier in error cases
    cpufreq: s3c2416: fix forgotten driver_data conversions

    Rafael J. Wysocki
     

24 Jun, 2013

1 commit

  • PRECHANGE and POSTCHANGE notifiers must be called in groups, i.e either both
    should be called or both shouldn't be.

    In case we have started PRECHANGE notifier and found an error, we must call
    POSTCHANGE notifier with freqs.new = freqs.old to guarantee that sequence of
    calling notifiers is complete.

    This patch fixes it.

    Cc: Mark Brown
    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar

    Viresh Kumar
     

04 Jun, 2013

1 commit

  • The "index" field of struct cpufreq_frequency_table was never an
    index and isn't used at all by the cpufreq core. It only is useful
    for cpufreq drivers for their internal purposes.

    Many people nowadays blindly set it in ascending order with the
    assumption that the core will use it, which is a mistake.

    Rename it to "driver_data" as that's what its purpose is. All of its
    users are updated accordingly.

    [rjw: Changelog]
    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Acked-by: Simon Horman
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     

02 Apr, 2013

1 commit

  • policy->cpus contains all online cpus that have single shared clock line. And
    their frequencies are always updated together.

    Many SMP system's cpufreq drivers take care of this in individual drivers but
    the best place for this code is in cpufreq core.

    This patch modifies cpufreq_notify_transition() to notify frequency change for
    all cpus in policy->cpus and hence updates all users of this API.

    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Acked-by: Stephen Warren
    Tested-by: Stephen Warren
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     

01 Mar, 2012

1 commit


09 Dec, 2011

1 commit


01 Nov, 2011

1 commit


14 Jul, 2011

4 commits

  • By extension from the 667MHz based clocks currently supported add 100MHz
    and 200MHz operating points. Due to a lack of documentation these have not
    been confirmed as supported but by extension from the existing frequencies
    they should be OK, and I've given them quite a bit of runtime testing.

    The major risk is synchronization with the non-ARM clocks but as we
    can't currently scale the ARM PLL the risk should be relatively low.

    Signed-off-by: Mark Brown
    Acked-by: Kukjin Kim
    Signed-off-by: Dave Jones

    Mark Brown
     
  • The CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notification is used to update things that depend on
    the system clock rates. Since this may include the interfaces used to talk
    to the regulators do the notification before we try to update regulators
    to reflect lowered system clock rate.

    The voltage scaling is just a power optimisation and may not happen at all
    so there's no concern about it not having completed.

    Signed-off-by: Mark Brown
    Acked-by: Kukjin Kim
    Signed-off-by: Dave Jones

    Mark Brown
     
  • At least some newer S3C6410 silicon supports operation up to 800MHz rather
    than just 667MHz. Unfortunately I don't have access to any of documentation
    of this other than some running systems, add a new cpufreq table entry for
    this based on the behaviour of those systems.

    Signed-off-by: Mark Brown
    Acked-by: Kukjin Kim
    Signed-off-by: Dave Jones

    Mark Brown
     
  • Cc: Mark Brown
    Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim
    Signed-off-by: Dave Jones

    Kukjin Kim