[CPUFREQ] Remove wall variable from cpufreq_gov_dbs_init()

CPUFREQ Remove wall variable from cpufreq_gov_dbs_init()

Remove wall variable from cpufreq_gov_dbs_init() as
get_cpu_idle_time_us() no longer updates the last_update_time
unconditionally. Passing non-NULL last_update_time address
will result in accounting additional idle time with
update_ts_time_stats() before returning idle_sleeptime.

Signed-off-by: Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
--
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c |    3 +--
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
[CPUFREQ] CPUfreq ondemand: update sampling rate without waiting for next sampling

When a new sampling rate is shorter than the current one, (e.g., 1 sec
--> 10 ms) regardless how short the new one is, the current ondemand
mechanism wait for the previously set timer to be expired.

For example, if the user has just expressed that the sampling rate
should be 10 ms from now and the previous was 1000 ms, the new rate may
become effective 999 ms later, which could be not acceptable for the
user if the user has intended to speed up sampling because the system is
expected to react to CPU load fluctuation quickly from __now__.

In order to address this issue, we need to cancel the previously set
timer (schedule_delayed_work) and reset the timer if resetting timer is
expected to trigger the delayed_work ealier.

Signed-off-by: MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
cpufreq / ondemand: update frequency when limits are relaxed

Reevaluate CPU load and update frequency immediately whenever limits
are changed. Currently ondemand doesn't do that when limits are
relaxed, wasting power on systems with relatively low sampling rate.

Signed-off-by: Michal Pecio <mpecio@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
cpufreq: ondemand: update sampling rate only on right CPUs

Fix cpufreq_gov_ondemand to skip CPU where another governor is used.

The bug present itself as NULL pointer access on the mutex_lock() call,
an can be reproduced on an SMP machine by setting the default governor
to anything other than ondemand, setting a single CPU's governor to
ondemand, then changing the sample rate by writing on:

> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate

Backtrace:

Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.585241] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at           (null)
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.585311] IP: [<ffffffff8174e082>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0xb2/0x170
[snip]
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587005] Call Trace:
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587030]  [<ffffffff8174da82>] mutex_lock+0x22/0x40
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587067]  [<ffffffff81610b8f>] store_sampling_rate+0xbf/0x150
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587110]  [<ffffffff81031e9c>] ?  __do_page_fault+0x1cc/0x4c0
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587153]  [<ffffffff813309bf>] kobj_attr_store+0xf/0x20
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587192]  [<ffffffff811bb62d>] sysfs_write_file+0xcd/0x140
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587234]  [<ffffffff8114c12c>] vfs_write+0xac/0x180
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587271]  [<ffffffff8114c472>] sys_write+0x52/0xa0
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587306]  [<ffffffff810321ce>] ?  do_page_fault+0xe/0x10
Nov 26 17:36:54 balto kernel: [  839.587345]  [<ffffffff81751202>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

Signed-off-by: Fabio Baltieri <fabio.baltieri@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>

Conflicts:

	drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
cpufreq: ondemand: Change the calculation of target frequency

The ondemand governor calculates load in terms of frequency and
increases it only if load_freq is greater than up_threshold
multiplied by the current or average frequency.  This appears to
produce oscillations of frequency between min and max because,
for example, a relatively small load can easily saturate minimum
frequency and lead the CPU to the max.  Then, it will decrease
back to the min due to small load_freq.

Change the calculation method of load and target frequency on the
basis of the following two observations:

 - Load computation should not depend on the current or average
   measured frequency.  For example, absolute load of 80% at 100MHz
   is not necessarily equivalent to 8% at 1000MHz in the next
   sampling interval.

 - It should be possible to increase the target frequency to any
   value present in the frequency table proportional to the absolute
   load, rather than to the max only, so that:

   Target frequency = C * load

   where we take C = policy->cpuinfo.max_freq / 100.

Tested on Intel i7-3770 CPU @ 3.40GHz and on Quad core 1500MHz Krait.
Phoronix benchmark of Linux Kernel Compilation 3.1 test shows an
increase ~1.5% in performance. cpufreq_stats (time_in_state) shows
that middle frequencies are used more, with this patch.  Highest
and lowest frequencies were used less by ~9%.

[rjw: We have run multiple other tests on kernels with this
 change applied and in the vast majority of cases it turns out
 that the resulting performance improvement also leads to reduced
 consumption of energy.  The change is additionally justified by
 the overall simplification of the code in question.]

Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Grarak <williye97@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
	drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h
	drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
cpufreq: ondemand:Fix NULL check for dbs_info->cur_policy

dbs_info->cur_policy can go NULL when processing
CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS, NULL check is required
before processing it

Change-Id: Iba99b563e230835dfcd24573335065d68ad25821
CRs-fixed: 576272
Signed-off-by: Swetha Chikkaboraiah <schikk@codeaurora.org>