[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <26502976.vPDNddhvVv@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:36:42 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Neil Zhang <zhangwm@...vell.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: coupled: fix dead loop corner case
On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 01:17:44 PM Neil Zhang wrote:
> There is a corener case when no peripheral irqs route to secondary
> cores.
> Let's take dual core system for example, the sequence is as following:
>
> Core 0 Core1
> 1. set waiting bit and enter waiting loop
> 2. set waiting bit and poke core1
> 3. clear poke in irq and enter safe state
> 4. set ready bit and enter ready loop
>
> Since there is no peripheral irq route to core 1, so it will stay in
> safe state forever, and core 0 will dead loop in the following code.
> while (!cpuidle_coupled_cpus_ready(coupled)) {
> /* Check if any other cpus bailed out of idle. */
> if (!cpuidle_coupled_cpus_waiting(coupled))
> }
>
> The solution is don't let secondary core enter safe state when it has
> already handled the poke interrupt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Neil Zhang <zhangwm@...vell.com>
> Reviewed-by: Fangsuo Wu <fswu@...vell.com>
Daniel, can you please have a look at this?
Rafael
> ---
> drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c b/drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c
> index 2a297f8..a37c718 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c
> @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ struct cpuidle_coupled {
> #define CPUIDLE_COUPLED_NOT_IDLE (-1)
>
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(cpuidle_coupled_lock);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, poke_sync);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct call_single_data, cpuidle_coupled_poke_cb);
>
> /*
> @@ -295,6 +296,7 @@ static void cpuidle_coupled_poked(void *info)
> {
> int cpu = (unsigned long)info;
> cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &cpuidle_coupled_poked_mask);
> + __this_cpu_write(poke_sync, true);
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -473,6 +475,7 @@ retry:
> * allowed for a single cpu.
> */
> while (!cpuidle_coupled_cpus_waiting(coupled)) {
> + __this_cpu_write(poke_sync, false);
> if (cpuidle_coupled_clear_pokes(dev->cpu)) {
> cpuidle_coupled_set_not_waiting(dev->cpu, coupled);
> goto out;
> @@ -483,6 +486,10 @@ retry:
> goto out;
> }
>
> + if (cpuidle_coupled_cpus_waiting(coupled)
> + && __this_cpu_read(poke_sync))
> + break;
> +
> entered_state = cpuidle_enter_state(dev, drv,
> dev->safe_state_index);
> }
>
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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