Message-Id: <201103021157.08260.trenn@suse.de>
Date:	Wed, 2 Mar 2011 11:57:07 +0100
From:	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hotplug@...r.kernel.org,
	fweisbec@...il.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, amit.kucheria@...aro.org,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 0/2] tracing, perf: cpu hotplug trace events

On Wednesday, March 02, 2011 08:56:25 AM Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > This patchset adds some tracepoints for tracing cpu state and for
> > profiling the plug and unplug sequence.
> > 
> > Some SMP arm platform uses cpu hotplug feature for improving their
> > power saving because they can go into their deepest idle state only in
> > mono core mode. In addition, running into mono core mode makes the
> > cpuidle job easier and more efficient which also results in the
> > improvement of power saving of some use cases. As the plug state of a
> > cpu can impact the cpuidle behavior, it's interesting to trace this
> > state and to correlate it with cpuidle traces.
> > Then, cpu hotplug is known to be an expensive operation which also
> > takes a variable time depending of other processes' activity (from
> > hundreds ms up to few seconds). These traces have shown that the arch
> > part stays almost constant on arm platform whatever the cpu load is,
> > whereas the plug duration increases.
> > 
> > ---
> >  include/trace/events/cpu_hotplug.h |  103
> >  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  kernel/cpu.c                       |   18 ++++++
> >  2 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 include/trace/events/cpu_hotplug.h
> 
> Why not do something much simpler and fit these into the existing
> power:* events:
> 
>      power:cpu_idle
>      power:cpu_frequency
>      power:machine_suspend
>      power:cpu_idle
>      power:cpu_frequency
>      power:machine_suspend
> 
> in an intelligent way?
> 
> CPU hotplug is really a 'soft' form of suspend and tools using power
> events could 
> thus immediately use CPU hotplug events as well.
> 
> A suitable new 'state' value could be used to signal CPU hotplug events:
> 
>  enum {
>         POWER_NONE = 0,
>         POWER_CSTATE = 1,
>         POWER_PSTATE = 2,
>  };
> 
> POWER_HSTATE for hotplug-state, or so.
Be careful, these are obsolete!
This information is in the name of the event itself:
PSTATE -> CPU frequency     -> power:cpu_frequency
CSTATE -> sleep/idle states -> power:cpu_idle

> This would also express the design arguments that others have pointed
> out in the prior discussion: that CPU hotplug is really a power
> management variant, and that in the long run it could be done via
> regular idle as well. When that happens, the above unified event
> structure makes it all even simpler - analysis tools will just 
> continue to work fine.

About the patch:
You create:
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_down_start
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_down_end
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_up_start
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_up_end
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_disable_start
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_disable_end
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_die_start
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_die_end
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_arch_up_start
cpu_hotplug:cpu_hotplug_arch_up_end

quite some events for cpu hotplugging...
You mix up two things you want to trace:
  1) The cpu hotplugging itself which you might want to compare
     with system activity, other idle states, etc. and check whether
     removing/adding CPUs works in respect of your power saving
     algorithms
  2) You want to trace the time __cpu_down and friends take to
     optimize them

For 1. I agree that it would be worth (mostly for arm now as long as
it's the only arch using this as a power saving feature, but it may show
up on other archs as well) to create an event which looks like:

power:cpu_hotplug(unsigned int state, unsigned int cpu_id)

Define a state:
CPU_HOT_PLUG 1
CPU_HOT_UNPLUG 2
This would be consistent with other power:* events. One idea of having
one event passing the state is, that it does not make sense to track an:
power:cpu_hotunplug or power:cpu_hotplug
standalone.

Theoretically this could get enhanced with further states:
CPU_HOT_PLUG_DISABLE_IRQS 3
CPU_HOT_PLUG_ENABLE_IRQS  4
CPU_HOT_PLUG_ACTIVATE     5
CPU_HOT_PLUG_DISABLE      6
...
if it should be possible at some point to only disable IRQs or to
only disable code processing or to only disable whatever to achieve
better power savings.
But as long as there only is the general cpu_hotplug interface
bringing the cpu totally up or down, above should be enough in
respect of power saving tracings.


For 2. you should use more appropriate tools to optimize the code
processed in __cpu_{,up,down,enable,disable,die} functions and friends.
If you simply need the time, system tab or kprobes might work out for you.
There is preloadtrace.ko based on a system tab script which instruments
functions called at boot up and measures their time.

Or probably better are perf profiling facilities. It should be possible
to profile __cpu_down and subsequent calls in detail. Like that you
should get a good picture which functions you have to look at and 
optimize. People in CC should better be able to tell you the exact perf 
commands and parameters you are looking for.


Hm, have you tried/thought about registering an extra cpuidle state with 
long latency doing the cpu_down? For CPU 0 it could call the deepest 
"normal" sleep state, but could decide to shut other cpus down. Like that 
you might be able to get rid of some extra code (interfering with cpuidle 
driver?) and you get all the statistics, etc. for free.


   Thomas
--
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