From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751963AbdB1X02 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2017 18:26:28 -0500 Received: from cloudserver094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:63145 "EHLO cloudserver094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751877AbdB1XZF (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2017 18:25:05 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Linux PM Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada , LKML Subject: [PATCH v2 3/3] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Fix intel_pstate_verify_policy() Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:11:05 +0100 Message-ID: <2160593.qOyP8m7930@aspire.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.10.0+; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <2326598.n0dkg1GrdM@aspire.rjw.lan> References: <2694426.SgxlQuL17D@aspire.rjw.lan> <2326598.n0dkg1GrdM@aspire.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Rafael J. Wysocki The code added to intel_pstate_verify_policy() by commit 1443ebbacfd7 (cpufreq: intel_pstate: Fix sysfs limits enforcement for performance policy) should use perf_limits instead of limits, because otherwise setting global limits via sysfs may affect policies inconsistently. For example, in the sequence of shell commands below, the scaling_min_freq attribute for policy1 and policy2 should be affected in the same way, because scaling_governor is set in the same way for both of them: # cat cpufreq/policy1/scaling_governor powersave # cat cpufreq/policy2/scaling_governor powersave # echo performance > cpufreq/policy0/scaling_governor # echo 94 > intel_pstate/min_perf_pct # cat cpufreq/policy0/scaling_min_freq 2914000 # cat cpufreq/policy1/scaling_min_freq 2914000 # cat cpufreq/policy2/scaling_min_freq 800000 The are affected differently, because intel_pstate_verify_policy() is invoked with limits set to &performance_limits (left behind by policy0) for policy1 and with limits set to &powersave_limits (left behind by policy1) for policy2. Since perf_limits is set to the set of limits matching the policy being updated, using it instead of limits fixes the inconsistency. Fixes: 1443ebbacfd7 (cpufreq: intel_pstate: Fix sysfs limits enforcement for performance policy) Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki --- drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c @@ -2208,9 +2208,9 @@ static int intel_pstate_verify_policy(st unsigned int max_freq, min_freq; max_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq * - limits->max_sysfs_pct / 100; + perf_limits->max_sysfs_pct / 100; min_freq = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq * - limits->min_sysfs_pct / 100; + perf_limits->min_sysfs_pct / 100; cpufreq_verify_within_limits(policy, min_freq, max_freq); }