Eric Lee / smarc-ti-linux-kernel

12 Mar, 2014

1 commit

06 Jan, 2014

1 commit

  • ae6b42713   cpufreq: Mark ARM drivers with CPUFREQ_NEED_INITIAL_FREQ_CHECK flag ... Browse Code »

    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

  • d4019f0a9   cpufreq: move freq change notifications to cpufreq core ... Browse Code »

    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

1 commit

  • 9c0ebcf78   cpufreq: Implement light weight ->target_index() routine ... Browse Code »

    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
     

16 Oct, 2013

2 commits

  • 200ea8e2c   cpufreq: pxa: don't initialize part of policy set by core ... Browse Code »

    Many common initializations of struct policy are moved to core now and hence
    this driver doesn't need to do it. This patch removes such code.

    Most recent of those changes is to call ->get() in the core after calling
    ->init().

    Cc: Eric Miao
    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     
  • bf36e48d7   cpufreq: pxa: Use generic cpufreq routines ... Browse Code »

    Most of the CPUFreq drivers do similar things in .exit() and .verify() routines
    and .attr. So its better if we have generic routines for them which can be used
    by cpufreq drivers then.

    This patch uses these generic routines in the PXA driver.

    Cc: Eric Miao
    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

    Viresh Kumar
     

01 Oct, 2013

2 commits

15 Aug, 2013

1 commit

04 Jun, 2013

1 commit

  • 507015880   cpufreq: rename index as driver_data in cpufreq_frequency_table ... Browse Code »

    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
     

08 Apr, 2013

1 commit