| 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: <2c1a18c9-6ceb-e135-876f-f832f5696124@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 13:32:53 +0300 (EEST)
From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Perry Yuan <perry.yuan@....com>
cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, Mario.Limonciello@....com,
Borislav.Petkov@....com, kprateek.nayak@....com, Alexander.Deucher@....com,
Xinmei.Huang@....com, bharathprabhu.perdoor@....com,
poonam.aggrwal@....com, Li.Meng@....com,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Xiaojian.Du@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] platform/x86/: hfi: init per-cpu scores for each
class
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024, Perry Yuan wrote:
> From: Perry Yuan <Perry.Yuan@....com>
>
> Initialize per cpu score `amd_hfi_ipcc_scores` which store energy score
> and performance score data for each class.
>
> `Classic core` and `Dense core` are ranked according to those values as
> energy efficiency capability or performance capability.
> OS scheduler will pick cores from the ranking list on each class ID for
> the thread which provide the class id got from hardware feedback
> interface.
>
> Signed-off-by: Perry Yuan <Perry.Yuan@....com>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c
> index 50f6ca9c148a..cd5f2b708ebf 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c
> @@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ struct amd_hfi_data {
> raw_spinlock_t table_lock;
> struct acpi_subtable_header *pcct_entry;
> struct amd_hfi_metadata *hfi_meta;
> + raw_spinlock_t hfi_data_lock;
> };
>
> /**
> @@ -130,6 +131,7 @@ struct amd_hfi_classes {
> * struct amd_hfi_cpuinfo - HFI workload class info per CPU
> * @cpu: cpu index
> * @cpus: cpu mask of cpus
> + * @apic_id: apic id of the current cpu
> * @class_index: workload class ID index
> * @nr_classa: max number of workload class supported
> * @amd_hfi_classes: current cpu workload class ranking data
> @@ -139,6 +141,7 @@ struct amd_hfi_classes {
> struct amd_hfi_cpuinfo {
> int cpu;
> cpumask_var_t cpus;
> + u32 apic_id;
> s16 class_index;
> u8 nr_class;
> struct amd_hfi_classes *amd_hfi_classes;
> @@ -146,6 +149,12 @@ struct amd_hfi_cpuinfo {
>
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct amd_hfi_cpuinfo, amd_hfi_cpuinfo) = {.class_index = -1};
>
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(hfi_cpuinfo_lock);
> +static int __percpu *amd_hfi_ipcc_scores;
> +
> +static int amd_set_hfi_ipcc_score(struct amd_hfi_cpuinfo *info, int cpu);
> +static int update_hfi_ipcc_scores(struct amd_hfi_data *amd_hfi_data);
Looks unnecessary forward declarations. In general, we try to arrange code
so that forward declarations are not required.
> +
> static int find_cpu_index_by_apicid(unsigned int target_apicid)
> {
> int cpu_index;
> @@ -293,6 +302,40 @@ static void amd_hfi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> mutex_destroy(&dev->lock);
> }
> +
> +static int amd_set_hfi_ipcc_score(struct amd_hfi_cpuinfo *hfi_cpuinfo, int cpu)
> +{
> + int i, *hfi_scores;
> + u8 nr_classes = hfi_cpuinfo->nr_class;
Reverse xmas tree order.
> +
> + hfi_scores = per_cpu_ptr(amd_hfi_ipcc_scores, cpu);
> + if (!hfi_scores)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_classes; i++)
Extra space.
> + WRITE_ONCE(hfi_scores[i], hfi_cpuinfo->amd_hfi_classes[i].perf);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int update_hfi_ipcc_scores(struct amd_hfi_data *amd_hfi_data)
> +{
> + int cpu;
> + int ret;
> +
> + raw_spin_lock_irq(&amd_hfi_data->hfi_data_lock);
Again, this is called from .probe so why you need a raw spinlock???
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> + struct amd_hfi_cpuinfo *hfi_cpuinfo = per_cpu_ptr(&amd_hfi_cpuinfo, cpu);
> +
> + ret = amd_set_hfi_ipcc_score(hfi_cpuinfo, cpu);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> + raw_spin_unlock_irq(&amd_hfi_data->hfi_data_lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static int amd_hfi_metadata_parser(struct platform_device *pdev,
> struct amd_hfi_data *amd_hfi_data)
> {
> @@ -344,6 +387,19 @@ static int amd_hfi_metadata_parser(struct platform_device *pdev,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int alloc_amd_hfi_ipcc_scores(struct amd_hfi_data *amd_hfi_data)
> +{
> + struct amd_hfi_metadata *hfi_meta = amd_hfi_data->hfi_meta;
> +
> + amd_hfi_ipcc_scores = __alloc_percpu(sizeof(*amd_hfi_ipcc_scores) *
> + hfi_meta->n_classes,
> + sizeof(*amd_hfi_ipcc_scores));
Align these continuation lines better.
--
i.
> + if (WARN_ON(!amd_hfi_ipcc_scores))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static const struct acpi_device_id amd_hfi_platform_match[] = {
> { "AMDI0104", 0},
> { }
> @@ -385,6 +441,7 @@ static int amd_hfi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> amd_hfi_data->dhandle = dhandle;
>
> raw_spin_lock_init(&amd_hfi_data->table_lock);
> + raw_spin_lock_init(&amd_hfi_data->hfi_data_lock);
> mutex_init(&amd_hfi_data->lock);
>
> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, amd_hfi_data);
> @@ -402,6 +459,14 @@ static int amd_hfi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> amd_hfi_data->hfi_meta->dynamic_rank_feature =
> cpuid_ebx(AMD_HETERO_CPUID_27) & 0xF;
> +
> + if (alloc_amd_hfi_ipcc_scores(amd_hfi_data))
> + goto err_exit;
> +
> + ret = update_hfi_ipcc_scores(amd_hfi_data);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_exit;
> +
> dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "%s driver registered.\n", pdev->name);
>
> return 0;
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists