diff options
| author | Yue Hu <huyue2@yulong.com> | 2021-02-24 14:39:27 +0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> | 2021-03-18 19:49:16 +0100 |
| commit | 389e4ecf5fec9464320971ec707893ccec5a04d1 (patch) | |
| tree | 0a68af3d0a037753f9f806a3060bcf5bb7e7a3af /kernel/sched | |
| parent | 1e28eed17697bcf343c6743f0028cc3b5dd88bf0 (diff) | |
| download | linux-next-389e4ecf5fec9464320971ec707893ccec5a04d1.tar.gz | |
cpufreq: schedutil: Call sugov_update_next_freq() before check to fast_switch_enabled
Note that sugov_update_next_freq() may return false, that means the
caller sugov_fast_switch() will do nothing except fast switch check.
Similarly, sugov_deferred_update() also has unnecessary operations
of raw_spin_{lock,unlock} in sugov_update_single_freq() for that case.
So, let's call sugov_update_next_freq() before the fast switch check
to avoid unnecessary behaviors above. Accordingly, update interface
definition to sugov_deferred_update() and remove sugov_fast_switch()
since we will call cpufreq_driver_fast_switch() directly instead.
Signed-off-by: Yue Hu <huyue2@yulong.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/sched')
| -rw-r--r-- | kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c | 29 |
1 files changed, 12 insertions, 17 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c index 50cbad89f7fa..6ee9c9bbe505 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c @@ -114,19 +114,8 @@ static bool sugov_update_next_freq(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time, return true; } -static void sugov_fast_switch(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time, - unsigned int next_freq) +static void sugov_deferred_update(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy) { - if (sugov_update_next_freq(sg_policy, time, next_freq)) - cpufreq_driver_fast_switch(sg_policy->policy, next_freq); -} - -static void sugov_deferred_update(struct sugov_policy *sg_policy, u64 time, - unsigned int next_freq) -{ - if (!sugov_update_next_freq(sg_policy, time, next_freq)) - return; - if (!sg_policy->work_in_progress) { sg_policy->work_in_progress = true; irq_work_queue(&sg_policy->irq_work); @@ -366,16 +355,19 @@ static void sugov_update_single_freq(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, sg_policy->cached_raw_freq = cached_freq; } + if (!sugov_update_next_freq(sg_policy, time, next_f)) + return; + /* * This code runs under rq->lock for the target CPU, so it won't run * concurrently on two different CPUs for the same target and it is not * necessary to acquire the lock in the fast switch case. */ if (sg_policy->policy->fast_switch_enabled) { - sugov_fast_switch(sg_policy, time, next_f); + cpufreq_driver_fast_switch(sg_policy->policy, next_f); } else { raw_spin_lock(&sg_policy->update_lock); - sugov_deferred_update(sg_policy, time, next_f); + sugov_deferred_update(sg_policy); raw_spin_unlock(&sg_policy->update_lock); } } @@ -454,12 +446,15 @@ sugov_update_shared(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time, unsigned int flags) if (sugov_should_update_freq(sg_policy, time)) { next_f = sugov_next_freq_shared(sg_cpu, time); + if (!sugov_update_next_freq(sg_policy, time, next_f)) + goto unlock; + if (sg_policy->policy->fast_switch_enabled) - sugov_fast_switch(sg_policy, time, next_f); + cpufreq_driver_fast_switch(sg_policy->policy, next_f); else - sugov_deferred_update(sg_policy, time, next_f); + sugov_deferred_update(sg_policy); } - +unlock: raw_spin_unlock(&sg_policy->update_lock); } |