[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070322031826.55d483e4.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 03:18:26 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add support for deferrable timers
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 13:22:17 -0700 Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com> wrote:
>
> Introduce a new flag for timers - 'deferrable timer'
> Timers that work normally when system is busy. But, will not cause CPU to
> come out of idle (just to service this timer), when CPU is idle. Instead,
> this timer will be serviced when CPU eventually wakes up with a subsequent
> non-deferrable timer or any other event.
>
> The main advantage of this is to avoid unnecessary timer interrupts when
> CPU is idle. If the routine currently called by a timer can wait until next
> event without any issues, this new timer can be used while setting up timer
> for that routine. This, with dynticks, allows CPUs to be lazy, allowing them
> to stay in idle for extended period of time by reducing unnecesary wakeup and
> thereby reducing the power consumption.
>
> This patch:
> Builds this new timer on top of existing timer infrastructure. It uses
> last bit in 'base' pointer of timer_list structure to store this
> deferrable timer flag. __next_timer_interrupt() function
> skips over these deferrable timers when CPU looks for
> next timer event for which it has to wake up.
>
> This is exported by a new interface init_timer_deferrable() that can
> be called in place of regular init_timer().
>
These patches cause a lockup during execuion of `halt -p'. See phuzzy foto
at http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/s5000486.jpg
It's fairly obvious why, when one looks at lock_timer_base().
Also,
>
> @@ -82,6 +82,46 @@
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(boot_tvec_bases);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(tvec_base_t *, tvec_bases) = &boot_tvec_bases;
>
> +/*
> + * The lowest bit of base ptr in timer is used as a flag to indicate
> + * 'deferrable' nature of the timer. Functions below help us manage that flag.
> + */
> +static inline struct tvec_t_base_s *tbase_get_base_ptr(
> + struct tvec_t_base_s *base)
> +{
> + return ((struct tvec_t_base_s *)
> + ((unsigned long)base & (~TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG)));
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned long tbase_get_deferrable_flag(
> + struct tvec_t_base_s *base)
> +{
> + return ((unsigned long)base & TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG);
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct tvec_t_base_s *tbase_set_deferrable_flag(
> + struct tvec_t_base_s *base)
> +{
> + return ((struct tvec_t_base_s *)
> + ((unsigned long)base | TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG));
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct tvec_t_base_s *tbase_clear_deferrable_flag(
> + struct tvec_t_base_s *base)
> +{
> + return ((struct tvec_t_base_s *)
> + ((unsigned long)base & (~TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG)));
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct tvec_t_base_s *tbase_merge_deferrable_flag(
> + struct tvec_t_base_s *base, unsigned long flag)
> +{
> + if (flag & TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG)
> + return tbase_set_deferrable_flag(base);
> + else
> + return tbase_clear_deferrable_flag(base);
> +}
The above helpers seem rather verbose and cumbersome. Looking at the
callsites:
> /**
> * __round_jiffies - function to round jiffies to a full second
> * @j: the time in (absolute) jiffies that should be rounded
> @@ -295,6 +335,13 @@
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(init_timer);
>
> +void fastcall init_timer_deferrable(struct timer_list *timer)
> +{
> + init_timer(timer);
> + timer->base = tbase_set_deferrable_flag(timer->base);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(init_timer_deferrable);
> +
> static inline void detach_timer(struct timer_list *timer,
> int clear_pending)
> {
> @@ -325,7 +372,7 @@
> tvec_base_t *base;
>
> for (;;) {
> - base = timer->base;
> + base = tbase_get_base_ptr(timer->base);
> if (likely(base != NULL)) {
> spin_lock_irqsave(&base->lock, *flags);
> if (likely(base == timer->base))
> @@ -364,12 +411,15 @@
> * the timer is serialized wrt itself.
> */
> if (likely(base->running_timer != timer)) {
> + unsigned long tflag;
> + tflag = tbase_get_deferrable_flag(timer->base);
> /* See the comment in lock_timer_base() */
> timer->base = NULL;
> spin_unlock(&base->lock);
> base = new_base;
> spin_lock(&base->lock);
> - timer->base = base;
> + timer->base =
> + tbase_merge_deferrable_flag(new_base, tflag);
> }
> }
I expect you'll find that the generated code could be improved by
tightening those functions up a bit.
For example,
static inline void timer_set_deferrable(struct timer *timer)
{
timer->base = (struct timer_list *)((unsigned long)timer->base |
TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG);
}
And I don't think we need the _flag in the names: timer_set_deferrable(),
timer_deferrable(), etc.
And the patch uses `unsigned long' everywhere to represent a flag which
can be 0 or 1. It would be better to use unsigned int.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists