Re: [PATCH v1 10/10] cpufreq: Pass policy pointer to ->update_limits()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 12:28 AM srinivas pandruvada
<srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2025-04-07 at 20:48 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 9:49 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Since cpufreq_update_limits() obtains a cpufreq policy pointer for
> > > the
> > > given CPU and reference counts the corresponding policy object, it
> > > may
> > > as well pass the policy pointer to the cpufreq driver's -
> > > >update_limits()
> > > callback which allows that callback to avoid invoking
> > > cpufreq_cpu_get()
> > > for the same CPU.
> > >
> > > Accordingly, redefine ->update_limits() to take a policy pointer
> > > instead
> > > of a CPU number and update both drivers implementing it,
> > > intel_pstate
> > > and amd-pstate, as needed.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> Hi Rafael,
>
> > Hi Srinivas,
> >
> > If you have any concerns regarding this patch, please let me know
> > (note that it is based on the [05/10]).
> >
> Changes looks fine, but wants to test out some update limits from
> interrupt path.
> Checked your branches at linux-pm, not able to locate in any branch to
> apply.
> Please point me to a branch.

I'll put it in 'testing' later today.