[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EF1A0B4.5080307@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:02:44 +0100
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...com>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
Trinabh Gupta <g.trinabh@...il.com>,
Deepthi Dharwar <deepthi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] coupled cpuidle state support
On 12/21/2011 1:09 AM, Colin Cross wrote:
> On some ARM SMP SoCs (OMAP4460, Tegra 2, and probably more), the
> cpus cannot be independently powered down, either due to
> sequencing restrictions (on Tegra 2, cpu 0 must be the last to
> power down), or due to HW bugs (on OMAP4460, a cpu powering up
> will corrupt the gic state unless the other cpu runs a work
> around). Each cpu has a power state that it can enter without
> coordinating with the other cpu (usually Wait For Interrupt, or
> WFI), and one or more "coupled" power states that affect blocks
> shared between the cpus (L2 cache, interrupt controller, and
> sometimes the whole SoC). Entering a coupled power state must
> be tightly controlled on both cpus.
>
> The easiest solution to implementing coupled cpu power states is
> to hotplug all but one cpu whenever possible, usually using a
> cpufreq governor that looks at cpu load to determine when to
> enable the secondary cpus. This causes problems, as hotplug is an
> expensive operation, so the number of hotplug transitions must be
> minimized, leading to very slow response to loads, often on the
> order of seconds.
>
> This patch series implements an alternative solution, where each
> cpu will wait in the WFI state until all cpus are ready to enter
> a coupled state, at which point the coupled state function will
> be called on all cpus at approximately the same time.
>
> Once all cpus are ready to enter idle, they are woken by an smp
> cross call. At this point, there is a chance that one of the
> cpus will find work to do, and choose not to enter suspend. A
> final pass is needed to guarantee that all cpus will call the
> power state enter function at the same time. During this pass,
> each cpu will increment the ready counter, and continue once the
> ready counter matches the number of online coupled cpus. If any
> cpu exits idle, the other cpus will decrement their counter and
> retry.
this smells fundamentally racey to me; you can get an interrupt one
cycle after you think you're done, but before the last guy enters WFI...
how do you solve that issue ?
--
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