| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20231206152646.GH12802@thinkpad>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2023 20:56:46 +0530
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>
To: Maramaina Naresh <quic_mnaresh@...cinc.com>
Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Peter Wang <peter.wang@...iatek.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, chu.stanley@...il.com,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, quic_cang@...cinc.com,
quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com, Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] ufs: core: Add CPU latency QoS support for ufs
driver
On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 08:00:59PM +0530, Maramaina Naresh wrote:
> Register ufs driver to CPU latency PM QoS framework can improves
> ufs device random io performance.
>
> PM QoS initialization will insert new QoS request into the CPU
> latency QoS list with the maximum latency PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE
> value.
>
> UFS driver will vote for performance mode on scale up and power
> save mode for scale down.
>
> If clock scaling feature is not enabled then voting will be based
> on clock on or off condition.
>
> tiotest benchmark tool io performance results on sm8550 platform:
>
> 1. Without PM QoS support
> Type (Speed in) | Average of 18 iterations
> Random Write(IPOS) | 41065.13
> Random Read(IPOS) | 37101.3
>
> 2. With PM QoS support
> Type (Speed in) | Average of 18 iterations
> Random Write(IPOS) | 46784.9
> Random Read(IPOS) | 42943.4
> (Improvement % with PM QoS = ~15%).
>
> Co-developed-by: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Naveen Kumar Goud Arepalli <quic_narepall@...cinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Maramaina Naresh <quic_mnaresh@...cinc.com>
> ---
> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h | 8 +++++
> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/ufs/ufshcd.h | 16 +++++++++
> 3 files changed, 86 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
> index f42d99ce5bf1..536805f6c4e1 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
> @@ -241,6 +241,14 @@ static inline void ufshcd_vops_config_scaling_param(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> hba->vops->config_scaling_param(hba, p, data);
> }
>
> +static inline u32 ufshcd_vops_config_qos_vote(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> +{
> + if (hba->vops && hba->vops->config_qos_vote)
> + return hba->vops->config_qos_vote(hba);
Please remove this callback as Bart noted.
> +
> + return UFSHCD_QOS_DEFAULT_VOTE;
> +}
> +
> static inline void ufshcd_vops_reinit_notify(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> {
> if (hba->vops && hba->vops->reinit_notify)
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> index ae9936fc6ffb..13370febd2b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> @@ -1001,6 +1001,20 @@ static bool ufshcd_is_unipro_pa_params_tuning_req(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> return ufshcd_get_local_unipro_ver(hba) < UFS_UNIPRO_VER_1_6;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * ufshcd_pm_qos_perf - vote for PM QoS performance or power save mode
ufshcd_pm_qos_update() - Update PM QoS request
> + * @hba: per adapter instance
> + * @on: If True, vote for perf PM QoS mode otherwise power save mode
> + */
> +static void ufshcd_pm_qos_perf(struct ufs_hba *hba, bool on)
> +{
> + if (!hba->pm_qos_init)
> + return;
> +
> + cpu_latency_qos_update_request(&hba->pm_qos_req, on ? hba->qos_vote
> + : PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
> +}
> +
> /**
> * ufshcd_set_clk_freq - set UFS controller clock frequencies
> * @hba: per adapter instance
> @@ -1153,6 +1167,10 @@ static int ufshcd_scale_clks(struct ufs_hba *hba, unsigned long freq,
> trace_ufshcd_profile_clk_scaling(dev_name(hba->dev),
> (scale_up ? "up" : "down"),
> ktime_to_us(ktime_sub(ktime_get(), start)), ret);
> +
> + if (!ret)
> + ufshcd_pm_qos_perf(hba, scale_up);
Can't you just move this before trace_ufshcd_profile_clk_scaling()? This also
avoids checking for !ret.
> +
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -9204,6 +9222,8 @@ static int ufshcd_setup_clocks(struct ufs_hba *hba, bool on)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + if (!ufshcd_is_clkscaling_supported(hba))
> + ufshcd_pm_qos_perf(hba, on);
> out:
> if (ret) {
> list_for_each_entry(clki, head, list) {
> @@ -9296,6 +9316,45 @@ static int ufshcd_init_clocks(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * ufshcd_pm_qos_init - initialize PM QoS instance
"Initialize PM QoS request"
> + * @hba: per adapter instance
> + */
> +static void ufshcd_pm_qos_init(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> +{
> + if (!(hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_PM_QOS))
> + return;
> +
> + /*
> + * called to configure PM QoS vote value for UFS host,
> + * expecting qos vote return value from caller else
> + * default vote value will be return.
> + */
> + hba->qos_vote = ufshcd_vops_config_qos_vote(hba);
No need of this variable too if you get rid of the callback.
> + cpu_latency_qos_add_request(&hba->pm_qos_req,
> + PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
> +
> + if (cpu_latency_qos_request_active(&hba->pm_qos_req))
> + hba->pm_qos_init = true;
Why do you need this flag?
> +
> + dev_dbg(hba->dev, "%s: QoS %s, qos_vote: %u\n", __func__,
> + hba->pm_qos_init ? "initialized" : "uninitialized",
> + hba->qos_vote);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * ufshcd_pm_qos_exit - remove instance from PM QoS
> + * @hba: per adapter instance
> + */
> +static void ufshcd_pm_qos_exit(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> +{
> + if (!hba->pm_qos_init)
> + return;
> +
> + cpu_latency_qos_remove_request(&hba->pm_qos_req);
> + hba->pm_qos_init = false;
> +}
> +
[...]
> /**
> * struct ufs_hba - per adapter private structure
> * @mmio_base: UFSHCI base register address
> @@ -912,6 +923,8 @@ enum ufshcd_mcq_opr {
> * @mcq_base: Multi circular queue registers base address
> * @uhq: array of supported hardware queues
> * @dev_cmd_queue: Queue for issuing device management commands
> + * @pm_qos_req: PM QoS request handle
> + * @pm_qos_init: flag to check if pm qos init completed
> */
> struct ufs_hba {
> void __iomem *mmio_base;
> @@ -1076,6 +1089,9 @@ struct ufs_hba {
> struct ufs_hw_queue *uhq;
> struct ufs_hw_queue *dev_cmd_queue;
> struct ufshcd_mcq_opr_info_t mcq_opr[OPR_MAX];
> + struct pm_qos_request pm_qos_req;
> + bool pm_qos_init;
> + u32 qos_vote;
Order doesn't match Kdoc.
- Mani
--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
Powered by blists - more mailing lists