return count;
}
-static ssize_t store_sampling_rate(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
- size_t count)
-{
- unsigned int input;
- int ret;
- ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &input);
-
- if (ret != 1)
- return -EINVAL;
-
- dbs_data->sampling_rate = max(input, dbs_data->min_sampling_rate);
- return count;
-}
-
static ssize_t store_up_threshold(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
size_t count)
{
DEFINE_MUTEX(dbs_data_mutex);
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dbs_data_mutex);
+/* Common sysfs tunables */
+/**
+ * store_sampling_rate - update sampling rate effective immediately if needed.
+ *
+ * If new rate is smaller than the old, simply updating
+ * dbs.sampling_rate might not be appropriate. For example, if the
+ * original sampling_rate was 1 second and the requested new sampling rate is 10
+ * ms because the user needs immediate reaction from ondemand governor, but not
+ * sure if higher frequency will be required or not, then, the governor may
+ * change the sampling rate too late; up to 1 second later. Thus, if we are
+ * reducing the sampling rate, we need to make the new value effective
+ * immediately.
+ *
+ * On the other hand, if new rate is larger than the old, then we may evaluate
+ * the load too soon, and it might we worth updating sample_delay_ns then as
+ * well.
+ *
+ * This must be called with dbs_data->mutex held, otherwise traversing
+ * policy_dbs_list isn't safe.
+ */
+ssize_t store_sampling_rate(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
+ size_t count)
+{
+ struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs;
+ unsigned int rate;
+ int ret;
+ ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &rate);
+ if (ret != 1)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ dbs_data->sampling_rate = max(rate, dbs_data->min_sampling_rate);
+
+ /*
+ * We are operating under dbs_data->mutex and so the list and its
+ * entries can't be freed concurrently.
+ */
+ list_for_each_entry(policy_dbs, &dbs_data->policy_dbs_list, list) {
+ mutex_lock(&policy_dbs->timer_mutex);
+ /*
+ * On 32-bit architectures this may race with the
+ * sample_delay_ns read in dbs_update_util_handler(), but that
+ * really doesn't matter. If the read returns a value that's
+ * too big, the sample will be skipped, but the next invocation
+ * of dbs_update_util_handler() (when the update has been
+ * completed) will take a sample. If the returned value is too
+ * small, the sample will be taken immediately, but that isn't a
+ * problem, as we want the new rate to take effect immediately
+ * anyway.
+ *
+ * If this runs in parallel with dbs_work_handler(), we may end
+ * up overwriting the sample_delay_ns value that it has just
+ * written, but the difference should not be too big and it will
+ * be corrected next time a sample is taken, so it shouldn't be
+ * significant.
+ */
+ gov_update_sample_delay(policy_dbs, dbs_data->sampling_rate);
+ mutex_unlock(&policy_dbs->timer_mutex);
+ }
+
+ return count;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(store_sampling_rate);
+
static inline struct dbs_data *to_dbs_data(struct kobject *kobj)
{
return container_of(kobj, struct dbs_data, kobj);
(struct cpufreq_policy *, unsigned int, unsigned int),
unsigned int powersave_bias);
void od_unregister_powersave_bias_handler(void);
+ssize_t store_sampling_rate(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
+ size_t count);
#endif /* _CPUFREQ_GOVERNOR_H */
/************************** sysfs interface ************************/
static struct dbs_governor od_dbs_gov;
-/**
- * update_sampling_rate - update sampling rate effective immediately if needed.
- * @new_rate: new sampling rate
- *
- * If new rate is smaller than the old, simply updating
- * dbs.sampling_rate might not be appropriate. For example, if the
- * original sampling_rate was 1 second and the requested new sampling rate is 10
- * ms because the user needs immediate reaction from ondemand governor, but not
- * sure if higher frequency will be required or not, then, the governor may
- * change the sampling rate too late; up to 1 second later. Thus, if we are
- * reducing the sampling rate, we need to make the new value effective
- * immediately.
- *
- * On the other hand, if new rate is larger than the old, then we may evaluate
- * the load too soon, and it might we worth updating sample_delay_ns then as
- * well.
- *
- * This must be called with dbs_data->mutex held, otherwise traversing
- * policy_dbs_list isn't safe.
- */
-static void update_sampling_rate(struct dbs_data *dbs_data,
- unsigned int new_rate)
-{
- struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs;
-
- dbs_data->sampling_rate = new_rate = max(new_rate,
- dbs_data->min_sampling_rate);
-
- /*
- * We are operating under dbs_data->mutex and so the list and its
- * entries can't be freed concurrently.
- */
- list_for_each_entry(policy_dbs, &dbs_data->policy_dbs_list, list) {
- mutex_lock(&policy_dbs->timer_mutex);
- /*
- * On 32-bit architectures this may race with the
- * sample_delay_ns read in dbs_update_util_handler(), but that
- * really doesn't matter. If the read returns a value that's
- * too big, the sample will be skipped, but the next invocation
- * of dbs_update_util_handler() (when the update has been
- * completed) will take a sample. If the returned value is too
- * small, the sample will be taken immediately, but that isn't a
- * problem, as we want the new rate to take effect immediately
- * anyway.
- *
- * If this runs in parallel with dbs_work_handler(), we may end
- * up overwriting the sample_delay_ns value that it has just
- * written, but the difference should not be too big and it will
- * be corrected next time a sample is taken, so it shouldn't be
- * significant.
- */
- gov_update_sample_delay(policy_dbs, new_rate);
- mutex_unlock(&policy_dbs->timer_mutex);
- }
-}
-
-static ssize_t store_sampling_rate(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
- size_t count)
-{
- unsigned int input;
- int ret;
- ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &input);
- if (ret != 1)
- return -EINVAL;
-
- update_sampling_rate(dbs_data, input);
- return count;
-}
-
static ssize_t store_io_is_busy(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, const char *buf,
size_t count)
{
projects / GitHub / MotorolaMobilityLLC / kernel-slsi.git / commitdiff