Message-ID: <48732338.GBX16FRDRa@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Wed, 20 Apr 2016 14:37:18 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
	Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] intel_pstate: support scheduler cpufreq callbacks on remote CPUs

On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 07:39:28 PM Steve Muckle wrote:
> In preparation for the scheduler cpufreq callback happening on remote
> CPUs, add support for this in intel_pstate, which requires the
> callback run on the local CPU to be able to change the CPU frequency.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Steve Muckle <smuckle@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 83 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> index 6c7cff13f0ed..fa49d3944aa5 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> @@ -162,6 +162,9 @@ struct _pid {
>   * struct cpudata -	Per CPU instance data storage
>   * @cpu:		CPU number for this instance data
>   * @update_util:	CPUFreq utility callback information
> + * @irq_work:		Data for passing remote callbacks to the target CPU
> + * @time:		Timestamp of CPUFreq callback
> + * @ipi_in_progress:	Whether a remote callback IPI is outstanding
>   * @pstate:		Stores P state limits for this CPU
>   * @vid:		Stores VID limits for this CPU
>   * @pid:		Stores PID parameters for this CPU
> @@ -179,6 +182,9 @@ struct cpudata {
>  	int cpu;
>  
>  	struct update_util_data update_util;
> +	struct irq_work irq_work;
> +	u64	time;
> +	bool	ipi_in_progress;
>  
>  	struct pstate_data pstate;
>  	struct vid_data vid;
> @@ -1173,20 +1179,88 @@ static inline void intel_pstate_adjust_busy_pstate(struct cpudata *cpu)
>  		get_avg_frequency(cpu));
>  }
>  
> +static void _intel_pstate_update_util(struct cpudata *cpu, u64 time)

What about calling this intel_pstate_update_cpu()?

> +{
> +	bool sample_taken = intel_pstate_sample(cpu, time);
> +
> +	if (sample_taken && !hwp_active)
> +		intel_pstate_adjust_busy_pstate(cpu);
> +}
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +static void intel_pstate_update_util_remote(struct irq_work *irq_work)
> +{
> +	struct cpudata *cpu = container_of(irq_work, struct cpudata, irq_work);
> +	s64 delta_ns = cpu->time - cpu->sample.time;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * A local update may have happened while the ipi
> +	 * was in progress so re-check the time.
> +	 */
> +	if (delta_ns < pid_params.sample_rate_ns)
> +		return;
> +
> +	_intel_pstate_update_util(cpu, cpu->time);
> +
> +	cpu->ipi_in_progress = false;
> +}
> +
>  static void intel_pstate_update_util(struct update_util_data *data, u64 time,
>  				     unsigned long util, unsigned long max)
>  {
>  	struct cpudata *cpu = container_of(data, struct cpudata, update_util);
> -	u64 delta_ns = time - cpu->sample.time;
> +	s64 delta_ns = time - cpu->sample.time;
>  
> -	if ((s64)delta_ns >= pid_params.sample_rate_ns) {
> -		bool sample_taken = intel_pstate_sample(cpu, time);
> +	if (delta_ns < pid_params.sample_rate_ns)

Why don't you check cpu->ipi_in_progress here too and bail out if it is set?

That would allow you to avoid checking the time again below, woulnd't it?

> +		return;
>  
> -		if (sample_taken && !hwp_active)
> -			intel_pstate_adjust_busy_pstate(cpu);
> +	if (cpu->cpu == smp_processor_id()) {
> +		_intel_pstate_update_util(cpu, time);
> +	} else {
> +		/* The target CPU's rq lock is held. */
> +		if (cpu->ipi_in_progress)
> +			return;
> +
> +		/* Re-check sample_time which may have advanced. */
> +		smp_rmb();
> +		delta_ns = time - READ_ONCE(cpu->sample.time);
> +		if (delta_ns < pid_params.sample_rate_ns)
> +			return;
> +
> +		cpu->ipi_in_progress = true;
> +		cpu->time = time;
> +		irq_work_queue_on(&cpu->irq_work, cpu->cpu);
>  	}
>  }
>  
> +static inline void intel_pstate_irq_work_sync(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +	irq_work_sync(&all_cpu_data[cpu]->irq_work);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void intel_pstate_init_irq_work(struct cpudata *cpu)
> +{
> +	init_irq_work(&cpu->irq_work, intel_pstate_update_util_remote);
> +}
> +#else /* !CONFIG_SMP */
> +static inline void intel_pstate_irq_work_sync(unsigned int cpu) {}
> +static inline void intel_pstate_init_irq_work(struct cpudata *cpu) {}
> +
> +static void intel_pstate_update_util(struct update_util_data *data, u64 time,
> +				     unsigned long util, unsigned long max)
> +{
> +	struct cpudata *cpu = container_of(data, struct cpudata, update_util);
> +	s64 delta_ns = time - cpu->sample.time;
> +
> +	if (delta_ns < pid_params.sample_rate_ns)
> +		return;
> +
> +	_intel_pstate_update_util(cpu, time);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +
> +

The additional two empty lines are not necessary.

>  #define ICPU(model, policy) \
>  	{ X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF,\
>  			(unsigned long)&policy }
> @@ -1273,6 +1347,7 @@ static void intel_pstate_clear_update_util_hook(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
>  	cpufreq_remove_update_util_hook(cpu);
>  	synchronize_sched();
> +	intel_pstate_irq_work_sync(cpu);
>  }
>  
>  static void intel_pstate_set_performance_limits(struct perf_limits *limits)
> @@ -1379,6 +1454,9 @@ static int intel_pstate_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  
>  	cpu = all_cpu_data[policy->cpu];
>  
> +	intel_pstate_init_irq_work(cpu);
> +
> +

One additional empty line should be sufficient here.

>  	if (limits->min_perf_pct == 100 && limits->max_perf_pct == 100)
>  		policy->policy = CPUFREQ_POLICY_PERFORMANCE;
>  	else
> 

Thanks,
Rafael

Powered by blists - more mailing lists