[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53ED263B.7030703@mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 14:12:27 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Chuansheng Liu <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, changcheng.liu@...el.com,
xiaoming.wang@...el.com, souvik.k.chakravarty@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: Fix the CPU stuck at C0 for 2-3s after PM_QOS
back to DEFAULT
On 08/14/2014 04:14 AM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 08/14/2014 01:00 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>
>> So seeing how you're from @intel.com I'm assuming you're using x86 here.
>>
>> I'm not seeing how this can be possible, MWAIT is interrupted by IPIs
>> just fine, which means we'll fall out of the cpuidle_enter(), which
>> means we'll cpuidle_reflect(), and then leave cpuidle_idle_call().
>>
>> It will indeed not leave the cpu_idle_loop() function and go right back
>> into cpuidle_idle_call(), but that will then call cpuidle_select() which
>> should pick a new C state.
>>
>> So the interrupt _should_ work. If it doesn't you need to explain why.
>
> I think the issue is related to the poll_idle state, in
> drivers/cpuidle/driver.c. This state is x86 specific and inserted in the
> cpuidle table as the state 0 (POLL). There is no mwait for this state.
> It is a bit confusing because this state is not listed in the acpi /
> intel idle driver but inserted implicitly at the beginning of the idle
> table by the cpuidle framework when the driver is registered.
>
> static int poll_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
> struct cpuidle_driver *drv, int index)
> {
> local_irq_enable();
> if (!current_set_polling_and_test()) {
> while (!need_resched())
> cpu_relax();
> }
> current_clr_polling();
>
> return index;
> }
As the most recent person to have modified this function, and as an
avowed hater of pointless IPIs, let me ask a rather different question:
why are you sending IPIs at all? As of Linux 3.16, poll_idle actually
supports the polling idle interface :)
Can't you just do:
if (set_nr_if_polling(rq->idle)) {
trace_sched_wake_idle_without_ipi(cpu);
} else {
spin_lock_irqsave(&rq->lock, flags);
if (rq->curr == rq->idle)
smp_send_reschedule(cpu);
// else the CPU wasn't idle; nothing to do
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rq->lock, flags);
}
In the common case (wake from C0, i.e. polling idle), this will skip the
IPI entirely unless you race with idle entry/exit, saving a few more
precious electrons and all of the latency involved in poking the APIC
registers.
--Andy
P.S. "30mV" in the patch description is presumably a typo.
--
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