| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20091008055409.GA32387@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 11:24:09 +0530
From: Arun R Bharadwaj <arun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Arun Bharadwaj <arun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [v7 PATCH 3/7]: x86: refactor x86 idle power management code
and remove all instances of pm_idle.
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> [2009-10-07 16:45:50]:
> On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 21:01 +0530, Arun R Bharadwaj wrote:
> > +++ linux.trees.git/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
> > #include <linux/pm.h>
> > #include <linux/clockchips.h>
> > #include <linux/random.h>
> > +#include <linux/cpuidle.h>
> > #include <trace/events/power.h>
> > #include <asm/system.h>
> > #include <asm/apic.h>
> > @@ -244,12 +245,6 @@ int sys_vfork(struct pt_regs *regs)
> > unsigned long boot_option_idle_override = 0;
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(boot_option_idle_override);
> >
> > -/*
> > - * Powermanagement idle function, if any..
> > - */
> > -void (*pm_idle)(void);
> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL(pm_idle);
> > -
> > #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> > /*
> > * This halt magic was a workaround for ancient floppy DMA
> > @@ -329,17 +324,15 @@ static void do_nothing(void *unused)
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > - * cpu_idle_wait - Used to ensure that all the CPUs discard old value of
> > - * pm_idle and update to new pm_idle value. Required while changing pm_idle
> > - * handler on SMP systems.
> > + * cpu_idle_wait - Required while changing idle routine handler on SMP systems.
> > *
> > - * Caller must have changed pm_idle to the new value before the call. Old
> > - * pm_idle value will not be used by any CPU after the return of this function.
> > + * Caller must have changed idle routine to the new value before the call. Old
> > + * value will not be used by any CPU after the return of this function.
> > */
> > void cpu_idle_wait(void)
> > {
> > smp_mb();
> > - /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
> > + /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of idle loop */
> > smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL, 1);
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpu_idle_wait);
> > @@ -518,15 +511,59 @@ static void c1e_idle(void)
> > default_idle();
> > }
> >
> > +static void (*local_idle)(void);
> > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpuidle_device, idle_devices);
> > +
> > +struct cpuidle_driver cpuidle_default_driver = {
> > + .name = "cpuidle_default",
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int local_idle_loop(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_state *st)
> > +{
> > + ktime_t t1, t2;
> > + s64 diff;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + t1 = ktime_get();
> > + local_idle();
> > + t2 = ktime_get();
> > +
> > + diff = ktime_to_us(ktime_sub(t2, t1));
> > + if (diff > INT_MAX)
> > + diff = INT_MAX;
> > + ret = (int) diff;
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int setup_cpuidle_simple(void)
> > +{
> > + struct cpuidle_device *dev;
> > + int cpu;
> > +
> > + if (!cpuidle_curr_driver)
> > + cpuidle_register_driver(&cpuidle_default_driver);
> > +
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> > + dev = &per_cpu(idle_devices, cpu);
> > + dev->cpu = cpu;
> > + dev->states[0].enter = local_idle_loop;
> > + dev->state_count = 1;
> > + cpuidle_register_device(dev);
> > + }
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +device_initcall(setup_cpuidle_simple);
> > +
> > void __cpuinit select_idle_routine(const struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > {
> > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > - if (pm_idle == poll_idle && smp_num_siblings > 1) {
> > + if (local_idle == poll_idle && smp_num_siblings > 1) {
> > printk(KERN_WARNING "WARNING: polling idle and HT enabled,"
> > " performance may degrade.\n");
> > }
> > #endif
> > - if (pm_idle)
> > + if (local_idle)
> > return;
> >
> > if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_MWAIT) && mwait_usable(c)) {
> > @@ -534,18 +571,20 @@ void __cpuinit select_idle_routine(const
> > * One CPU supports mwait => All CPUs supports mwait
> > */
> > printk(KERN_INFO "using mwait in idle threads.\n");
> > - pm_idle = mwait_idle;
> > + local_idle = mwait_idle;
> > } else if (check_c1e_idle(c)) {
> > printk(KERN_INFO "using C1E aware idle routine\n");
> > - pm_idle = c1e_idle;
> > + local_idle = c1e_idle;
> > } else
> > - pm_idle = default_idle;
> > + local_idle = default_idle;
> > +
> > + return;
> > }
> >
> > void __init init_c1e_mask(void)
> > {
> > /* If we're using c1e_idle, we need to allocate c1e_mask. */
> > - if (pm_idle == c1e_idle)
> > + if (local_idle == c1e_idle)
> > zalloc_cpumask_var(&c1e_mask, GFP_KERNEL);
> > }
> >
> > @@ -556,7 +595,7 @@ static int __init idle_setup(char *str)
> >
> > if (!strcmp(str, "poll")) {
> > printk("using polling idle threads.\n");
> > - pm_idle = poll_idle;
> > + local_idle = poll_idle;
> > } else if (!strcmp(str, "mwait"))
> > force_mwait = 1;
> > else if (!strcmp(str, "halt")) {
> > @@ -567,7 +606,7 @@ static int __init idle_setup(char *str)
> > * To continue to load the CPU idle driver, don't touch
> > * the boot_option_idle_override.
> > */
> > - pm_idle = default_idle;
> > + local_idle = default_idle;
> > idle_halt = 1;
> > return 0;
> > } else if (!strcmp(str, "nomwait")) {
>
>
> What guarantees that the cpuidle bits actually select this
> cpuidle_default driver when you do idle=poll?
>
> Also, cpuidle already has a poll loop in it, why duplicate that?
>
Yes, now i see it.. I'll get rid of the redundant poll_idle definition
--
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