linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: queue policy->update work to rt thread to reduce its schedule latency

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b07c39fab5ac0e32e7768ed3e8a799c8eb68802a.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 15:03:04 -0700
From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Gaowei Pu <pugaowei@...o.com>, rafael@...nel.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: queue policy->update work to rt thread to
 reduce  its schedule latency

On Wed, 2024-07-17 at 14:33 +0800, Gaowei Pu wrote:
> Currently we encountered a problem that the cpufreq boost latency
> is about 10 milliseconds or worse when we boost through cpufreq QOS request
> under high workload scenarios, while the boost latency mainly consumed by
> schedule latency of policy->update work.

What is the tail latency now after your change?

> 
> We should ensure the low schedule latency of cpu frequency limits work
> to meet performance and power demands. so queue the policy->update work
> to rt thread to reduce its schedule latency.

If my understanding is correct, kthread has a default nice
value of 0 and is not a rt thread. 

I think the gain you see is
your patch created a dedicated kthread work queue on CPU 0.
The work from policy change no longer have to compete time with other
requests coming from schedule_work(). 

If the policy change really needs to get ahead
of other tasks, I think you need a dedicated
workqueue with alloc_workqueue() using WQ_HIGHPRI flag.

Tim

> 
> Signed-off-by: Gaowei Pu <pugaowei@...o.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------
>  include/linux/cpufreq.h   |  4 +++-
>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index a45aac17c20f..e6e42a3ba9ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1193,7 +1193,7 @@ void refresh_frequency_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(refresh_frequency_limits);
>  
> -static void handle_update(struct work_struct *work)
> +static void handle_update(struct kthread_work *work)
>  {
>  	struct cpufreq_policy *policy =
>  		container_of(work, struct cpufreq_policy, update);
> @@ -1209,7 +1209,7 @@ static int cpufreq_notifier_min(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long freq,
>  {
>  	struct cpufreq_policy *policy = container_of(nb, struct cpufreq_policy, nb_min);
>  
> -	schedule_work(&policy->update);
> +	kthread_queue_work(policy->worker, &policy->update);
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> @@ -1218,7 +1218,7 @@ static int cpufreq_notifier_max(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long freq,
>  {
>  	struct cpufreq_policy *policy = container_of(nb, struct cpufreq_policy, nb_max);
>  
> -	schedule_work(&policy->update);
> +	kthread_queue_work(policy->worker, &policy->update);
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> @@ -1301,15 +1301,25 @@ static struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_policy_alloc(unsigned int cpu)
>  		goto err_min_qos_notifier;
>  	}
>  
> +	policy->worker = kthread_create_worker_on_cpu(cpu, 0, "policy_worker%d", cpu);
> +	if (IS_ERR(policy->worker)) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "Failed to create policy_worker%d\n", cpu);
> +		goto err_max_qos_notifier;
> +	}
> +
> +	sched_set_fifo_low(policy->worker->task);
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&policy->policy_list);
>  	init_rwsem(&policy->rwsem);
>  	spin_lock_init(&policy->transition_lock);
>  	init_waitqueue_head(&policy->transition_wait);
> -	INIT_WORK(&policy->update, handle_update);
> +	kthread_init_work(&policy->update, handle_update);
>  
>  	policy->cpu = cpu;
>  	return policy;
>  
> +err_max_qos_notifier:
> +	freq_qos_remove_notifier(&policy->constraints, FREQ_QOS_MAX,
> +				 &policy->nb_max);
>  err_min_qos_notifier:
>  	freq_qos_remove_notifier(&policy->constraints, FREQ_QOS_MIN,
>  				 &policy->nb_min);
> @@ -1353,7 +1363,9 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  				 &policy->nb_min);
>  
>  	/* Cancel any pending policy->update work before freeing the policy. */
> -	cancel_work_sync(&policy->update);
> +	kthread_cancel_work_sync(&policy->update);
> +	if (policy->worker)
> +		kthread_destroy_worker(policy->worker);
>  
>  	if (policy->max_freq_req) {
>  		/*
> @@ -1802,7 +1814,7 @@ static unsigned int cpufreq_verify_current_freq(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, b
>  
>  		cpufreq_out_of_sync(policy, new_freq);
>  		if (update)
> -			schedule_work(&policy->update);
> +			kthread_queue_work(policy->worker, &policy->update);
>  	}
>  
>  	return new_freq;
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpufreq.h b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> index 20f7e98ee8af..73029daddfc5 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
>  #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>  #include <linux/sysfs.h>
>  #include <linux/minmax.h>
> +#include <linux/kthread.h>
>  
>  /*********************************************************************
>   *                        CPUFREQ INTERFACE                          *
> @@ -77,8 +78,9 @@ struct cpufreq_policy {
>  	void			*governor_data;
>  	char			last_governor[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN]; /* last governor used */
>  
> -	struct work_struct	update; /* if update_policy() needs to be
> +	struct kthread_work	update; /* if update_policy() needs to be
>  					 * called, but you're in IRQ context */
> +	struct kthread_worker *worker;
>  
>  	struct freq_constraints	constraints;
>  	struct freq_qos_request	*min_freq_req;