Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver: char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (one position for '\0'). Current name is crossing this limit and so name doesn't get printed properly when we do:
$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver
This patch renames driver-name to fix this issue.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org --- drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c index 8b7ec18..541fc40 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver vexpress_cpufreq_driver = { .target = vexpress_cpufreq_set_target, .get = vexpress_cpufreq_get, .init = vexpress_cpufreq_init, - .name = "cpufreq_vexpress", + .name = "vexpress-bL", .attr = vexpress_cpufreq_attr, };
On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver: char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (one position for '\0'). Current name is crossing this limit and so name doesn't get printed properly when we do:
$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver
This patch renames driver-name to fix this issue.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Acked-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com
drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c index 8b7ec18..541fc40 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver vexpress_cpufreq_driver = { .target = vexpress_cpufreq_set_target, .get = vexpress_cpufreq_get, .init = vexpress_cpufreq_init,
.name = "cpufreq_vexpress",
.name = "vexpress-bL", .attr = vexpress_cpufreq_attr,
-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:27 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver: char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (one position for '\0'). Current name is crossing this limit and so name doesn't get printed properly when we do:
$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver
This patch renames driver-name to fix this issue.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Acked-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com
Shall I apply this to the ARM Landing Team vexpress tree then?
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) tixy@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:27 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver: char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (one position for '\0'). Current name is crossing this limit and so name doesn't get printed properly when we do:
$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver
This patch renames driver-name to fix this issue.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Acked-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com
Shall I apply this to the ARM Landing Team vexpress tree then?
I'd say yes, the driver lives in your tree. I'm not sure how you coordinate the code drops with ARM since it should be in their tree as well for the future.
drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c index 8b7ec18..541fc40 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver vexpress_cpufreq_driver = { .target = vexpress_cpufreq_set_target, .get = vexpress_cpufreq_get, .init = vexpress_cpufreq_init,
.name = "cpufreq_vexpress",
.name = "vexpress-bL", .attr = vexpress_cpufreq_attr,
On 09/10/12 11:33, Amit Kucheria wrote:
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) tixy@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:27 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver: char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (one position for '\0'). Current name is crossing this limit and so name doesn't get printed properly when we do:
$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver
This patch renames driver-name to fix this issue.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Acked-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com
Shall I apply this to the ARM Landing Team vexpress tree then?
I'd say yes, the driver lives in your tree. I'm not sure how you coordinate the code drops with ARM since it should be in their tree as well for the future.
Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is not appropriate name for it including the file name(my bad choice at first).
drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c index 8b7ec18..541fc40 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/vexpress_bL_cpufreq.c @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver vexpress_cpufreq_driver = { .target = vexpress_cpufreq_set_target, .get = vexpress_cpufreq_get, .init = vexpress_cpufreq_init,
.name = "cpufreq_vexpress",
.name = "vexpress-bL", .attr = vexpress_cpufreq_attr,
-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is not appropriate name for it including the file name(my bad choice at first).
Just to be painfully precise ;-) I must say it's not TC2 specific, but V2P-CA15_A7 specific. TC2 == Test Chip 2, also known as Garuda. The SPC that the driver talks to is _not_ a part of the TC2, it's a separate component of the V2P-CA15_A7 core tile (HBI0249).
Paweł
On 9 October 2012 16:24, Pawel Moll pawel.moll@arm.com wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is not appropriate name for it including the file name(my bad choice at first).
Just to be painfully precise ;-) I must say it's not TC2 specific, but V2P-CA15_A7 specific. TC2 == Test Chip 2, also known as Garuda. The SPC that the driver talks to is _not_ a part of the TC2, it's a separate component of the V2P-CA15_A7 core tile (HBI0249).
Why is it CA15_A7 specific? It looks to me like a simple cpufreq driver for vexpress board, that may support any coretile... Single cluster, multicluster (big LITTLE or otherwise)...
What's in there for CA15 or A7 ?
-- viresh
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 12:34 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 9 October 2012 16:24, Pawel Moll pawel.moll@arm.com wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is not appropriate name for it including the file name(my bad choice at first).
Just to be painfully precise ;-) I must say it's not TC2 specific, but V2P-CA15_A7 specific. TC2 == Test Chip 2, also known as Garuda. The SPC that the driver talks to is _not_ a part of the TC2, it's a separate component of the V2P-CA15_A7 core tile (HBI0249).
Why is it CA15_A7 specific? It looks to me like a simple cpufreq driver for vexpress board, that may support any coretile... Single cluster, multicluster (big LITTLE or otherwise)...
What's in there for CA15 or A7 ?
It's not about A15 or A7, but about V2P-CA15_A7 ;-) That's what the "TC2 core tile" is officially called.
The driver talks to firmware running on the microcontroller on the tile. No other VE tile (so far) has similar interface available, so it is specific for this particular core tile.
Now, _if_ some of future boards share the same interface for the power management firmware (and the _if_ is a big _IF_ ;-), it still wouldn't be TC2-specific (because the future boards will not use TC2). So maybe we want to call it something like "vexpress-spc" (or whatever three letter acronym we use here ;-) and hope for the best?
Paweł
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 12:45 +0100, Pawel Moll wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 12:34 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 9 October 2012 16:24, Pawel Moll pawel.moll@arm.com wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is not appropriate name for it including the file name(my bad choice at first).
Just to be painfully precise ;-) I must say it's not TC2 specific, but V2P-CA15_A7 specific. TC2 == Test Chip 2, also known as Garuda. The SPC that the driver talks to is _not_ a part of the TC2, it's a separate component of the V2P-CA15_A7 core tile (HBI0249).
Why is it CA15_A7 specific? It looks to me like a simple cpufreq driver for vexpress board, that may support any coretile... Single cluster, multicluster (big LITTLE or otherwise)...
What's in there for CA15 or A7 ?
It's not about A15 or A7, but about V2P-CA15_A7 ;-) That's what the "TC2 core tile" is officially called.
The driver talks to firmware running on the microcontroller on the tile. No other VE tile (so far) has similar interface available, so it is specific for this particular core tile.
Now, _if_ some of future boards share the same interface for the power management firmware (and the _if_ is a big _IF_ ;-), it still wouldn't be TC2-specific (because the future boards will not use TC2). So maybe we want to call it something like "vexpress-spc" (or whatever three letter acronym we use here ;-) and hope for the best?
I've gone with this "vexpress-spc" name for the coming Linaro release.
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
On 09/10/12 11:33, Amit Kucheria wrote:
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) tixy@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:27 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver: char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (one position for '\0'). Current name is crossing this limit and so name doesn't get printed properly when we do:
$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver
This patch renames driver-name to fix this issue.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Acked-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com
Shall I apply this to the ARM Landing Team vexpress tree then?
I'd say yes, the driver lives in your tree. I'm not sure how you coordinate the code drops with ARM since it should be in their tree as well for the future.
Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is not appropriate name for it including the file name(my bad choice at first).
Considering the confusion over what the correct naming should be, I don't think it's worth me apply the renaming patch at the moment ;-)
On 9 October 2012 21:02, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) tixy@linaro.org wrote:
Considering the confusion over what the correct naming should be, I don't think it's worth me apply the renaming patch at the moment ;-)
This thread went into another direction, than the one it was intended for :)
Looks correct, would be better if Sudeep can send a quick patch with renaming of file/routines/driver. Because the initial issue reported by me was a bug and has to be fixed ASAP.
-- viresh
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 22:15 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 9 October 2012 21:02, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) tixy@linaro.org wrote:
Considering the confusion over what the correct naming should be, I don't think it's worth me apply the renaming patch at the moment ;-)
This thread went into another direction, than the one it was intended for :)
Looks correct, would be better if Sudeep can send a quick patch with renaming of file/routines/driver. Because the initial issue reported by me was a bug and has to be fixed ASAP.
Perhaps I misunderstood the bug, I though it was just a name getting truncated and was otherwise harmless. If it's causing real problems then I'll apply the original suggested patch and not worry about other cosmetic renaming issues.
On 9 October 2012 22:30, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) tixy@linaro.org wrote:
Perhaps I misunderstood the bug, I though it was just a name getting truncated and was otherwise harmless. If it's causing real problems then I'll apply the original suggested patch and not worry about other cosmetic renaming issues.
No real working failure without this patch. Only while doing
$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_driver
We don't get a new line entered at the print..
So, currently we get something like: cpufreq_vexpress$/root/:
-- viresh
-
Amit Kucheria -
Jon Medhurst (Tixy) -
Pawel Moll -
Sudeep KarkadaNagesha -
Viresh Kumar