mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
To: Naresh Solanki <naresh.solanki@9elements.com>
Cc: Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>,
	"Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
	Perry Yuan <perry.yuan@amd.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Refactor max frequency calculation
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2025 13:02:19 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <746f627c-49cf-497d-bfc3-646d2668cd51@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241219201833.2750998-1-naresh.solanki@9elements.com>

On 12/19/2024 14:18, Naresh Solanki wrote:
> The previous approach introduced roundoff errors during division when
> calculating the boost ratio. This, in turn, affected the maximum
> frequency calculation, often resulting in reporting lower frequency
> values.
> 
> For example, on the Glinda SoC based board with the following
> parameters:
> 
> max_perf = 208
> nominal_perf = 100
> nominal_freq = 2600 MHz
> 
> The Linux kernel previously calculated the frequency as:
> freq = ((max_perf * 1024 / nominal_perf) * nominal_freq) / 1024
> freq = 5405 MHz  // Integer arithmetic.
> 
> With the updated formula:
> freq = (max_perf * nominal_freq) / nominal_perf
> freq = 5408 MHz
> 
> This change ensures more accurate frequency calculations by eliminating
> unnecessary shifts and divisions, thereby improving precision.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Naresh Solanki <naresh.solanki@9elements.com>
> 
> Changes in V3:
> 1. Also update the same for lowest_nonlinear_freq
> 
> Changes in V2:
> 1. Rebase on superm1.git/linux-next branch
> ---

Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>

BTW - Over the holiday I added this to my bleeding-edge branch [1] and 
have done testing with it.  I will be including it in my next 6.14 PR, 
thanks!

[1] 
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/superm1/linux.git/commit/?h=bleeding-edge&id=857a61c2ce74e30fc3b10bc89d68ddd8d05b188c

>   drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c | 13 ++++---------
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> index d7b1de97727a..6f6f3220ffe4 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> @@ -908,9 +908,8 @@ static int amd_pstate_init_freq(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
>   {
>   	int ret;
>   	u32 min_freq, max_freq;
> -	u32 nominal_perf, nominal_freq;
> +	u32 highest_perf, nominal_perf, nominal_freq;
>   	u32 lowest_nonlinear_perf, lowest_nonlinear_freq;
> -	u32 boost_ratio, lowest_nonlinear_ratio;
>   	struct cppc_perf_caps cppc_perf;
>   
>   	ret = cppc_get_perf_caps(cpudata->cpu, &cppc_perf);
> @@ -927,16 +926,12 @@ static int amd_pstate_init_freq(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
>   	else
>   		nominal_freq = cppc_perf.nominal_freq;
>   
> +	highest_perf = READ_ONCE(cpudata->highest_perf);
>   	nominal_perf = READ_ONCE(cpudata->nominal_perf);
> -
> -	boost_ratio = div_u64(cpudata->highest_perf << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT, nominal_perf);
> -	max_freq = (nominal_freq * boost_ratio >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT);
> +	max_freq = div_u64((u64)highest_perf * nominal_freq, nominal_perf);
>   
>   	lowest_nonlinear_perf = READ_ONCE(cpudata->lowest_nonlinear_perf);
> -	lowest_nonlinear_ratio = div_u64(lowest_nonlinear_perf << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT,
> -					 nominal_perf);
> -	lowest_nonlinear_freq = (nominal_freq * lowest_nonlinear_ratio >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT);
> -
> +	lowest_nonlinear_freq = div_u64((u64)nominal_freq * lowest_nonlinear_perf, nominal_perf);
>   	WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->min_freq, min_freq * 1000);
>   	WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->lowest_nonlinear_freq, lowest_nonlinear_freq * 1000);
>   	WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->nominal_freq, nominal_freq * 1000);


      reply	other threads:[~2025-01-07 19:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-19 20:18 Naresh Solanki
2025-01-07 19:02 ` Mario Limonciello [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=746f627c-49cf-497d-bfc3-646d2668cd51@amd.com \
    --to=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
    --cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=naresh.solanki@9elements.com \
    --cc=perry.yuan@amd.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=ray.huang@amd.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®