Re: [PATCH v7 5/5] rockchip/soc/drivers: Add DTPM description for rk3399

From: Daniel Lezcano
Date: Fri Jan 28 2022 - 10:13:19 EST



Hi Heiko,

thanks for your comments

On 28/01/2022 11:19, Heiko Stübner wrote:
Am Dienstag, 25. Januar 2022, 18:18:09 CET schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
The DTPM framework does support now the hierarchy description.

The platform specific code can call the hierarchy creation function
with an array of struct dtpm_node pointing to their parent.

This patch provides a description of the big / Little CPUs and the
GPU and tie them together under a virtual 'package' name. Only rk3399 is
described now.

The description could be extended in the future with the memory
controller with devfreq.

The description is always a module and it describes the soft
dependencies. The userspace has to load the softdeps module in the
right order.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>

[ ... ]

+static struct dtpm_node __initdata rk3399_hierarchy[] = {

The driver is tristate so buildable as module but uses __initdata.
As it depends on panfrost (which also can be a module) you
probably want a "__initdata_or_module" here .

Well, actually the dependency is wrong.

It should be:

depends on DTPM && m

It will be compiled always as a module.

Referring to the Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst

"After boot, the kernel frees up a special section; functions marked with
``__init`` and data structures marked with ``__initdata`` are dropped
after boot is complete: similarly modules discard this memory after
initialization."

So after the module is loaded and the hierarchy is created, nothing will stay in memory (except the future module exit function)


+ [0]{ .name = "rk3399",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_VIRTUAL },
+ [1]{ .name = "package",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_VIRTUAL,
+ .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[0] },
+ [2]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@0",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
+ .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
+ [3]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@1",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
+ .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
+ [4]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@2",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
+ .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
+ [5]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@3",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
+ .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
+ [6]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@100",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
+ .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
+ [7]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@101",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
+ .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
+ [8]{ .name = "/gpu@ff9a0000",
+ .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
+ .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
+ [9]{ },

hmm, do we want a "/* sentinel */" inside the empty last entry?
I think that is pretty common to denote the "this one is the last entry"
of a dynamic list ;-)

Sure

+};
+
+static struct of_device_id __initdata rockchip_dtpm_match_table[] = {
+ { .compatible = "rockchip,rk3399", .data = rk3399_hierarchy },
+ {},
+};
+
+static int __init rockchip_dtpm_init(void)
+{
+ return dtpm_create_hierarchy(rockchip_dtpm_match_table);
+}
+module_init(rockchip_dtpm_init);

Just for my understanding what happens on driver unload?

ATM it is not possible to unload it.

A second series with the hierarchy destruction will follow once this series is merged. The module unloading will be added here.


--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog