[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <05820baa-b0a2-49e0-8b47-360774969e69@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 10:59:45 +0100
From: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@....com>
To: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc: Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>, kajetan.puchalski@....com,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: teo: fix underflow of recent intercepts
On 5/19/24 22:03, Christian Loehle wrote:
> The recent counter of each cpuidle state bin reflects the number of
> recent intercepts. It's decremented and incremented accordingly.
> The decrement was never checked for 0, therefore underflowing into a
> value teo cannot easily recover from.
>
> The underflow lead to deeper idle states being skipped because teo
> assumed interception was likely and it preferring shallower states.
>
> Fixes: 77577558f25d ("cpuidle: teo: Rework most recent idle duration values treatment")
> Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@....com>
> ---
> drivers/cpuidle/governors/teo.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/teo.c b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/teo.c
> index 7244f71c59c5..42fb2771e35d 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/teo.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/teo.c
> @@ -290,7 +290,8 @@ static void teo_update(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev)
> if (cpu_data->next_recent_idx >= NR_RECENT)
> cpu_data->next_recent_idx = 0;
>
> - if (cpu_data->recent_idx[i] >= 0)
> + if (cpu_data->recent_idx[i] >= 0 &&
> + cpu_data->state_bins[cpu_data->recent_idx[i]].recent)
> cpu_data->state_bins[cpu_data->recent_idx[i]].recent--;
>
> /*
You should be able to observe the problematic underflow on any system.
Essentially these lines:
alt_intercepts = 2 * idx_intercept_sum > cpu_data->total - idx_hit_sum;
alt_recent = idx_recent_sum > NR_RECENT / 2; // CL: idx_recent_sum being the sum of a bunch of underflowed recent values, so expected to be big, too.
if (alt_recent || alt_intercepts) {
become
if (true) {
but the if block actually overriding the state should only be possible
for systems with >2 cpuidle states.
I'll follow up with a more detailed report though.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists