From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@intel.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, len.brown@intel.com,
ak@linux.intel.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/8] cpuidle: record the overhead of idle entry
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 02:35:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2672521.fEEa1b19Vu@aspire.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1506756034-6340-3-git-send-email-aubrey.li@intel.com>
On Saturday, September 30, 2017 9:20:28 AM CEST Aubrey Li wrote:
> Record the overhead of idle entry in micro-second
>
What is this needed for?
> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/cpuidle.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> kernel/sched/idle.c | 8 +++++++-
> 3 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> index 60bb64f..4066308 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> @@ -302,6 +302,39 @@ void cpuidle_reflect(struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index)
> cpuidle_curr_governor->reflect(dev, index);
> }
>
> +/* cpuidle_entry_start - record idle entry start */
A proper kerneldoc, please.
> +void cpuidle_entry_start(void)
> +{
> + struct cpuidle_device *dev = cpuidle_get_device();
> +
> + if (dev)
> + dev->idle_stat.entry_start = local_clock();
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * cpuidle_entry_end - record idle entry end, and maintain
> + * the entry overhead average in micro-second
> + */
A proper kerneldoc, please.
> +void cpuidle_entry_end(void)
> +{
> + struct cpuidle_device *dev = cpuidle_get_device();
> + u64 overhead;
> + s64 diff;
> +
> + if (dev) {
> + dev->idle_stat.entry_end = local_clock();
> + overhead = div_u64(dev->idle_stat.entry_end -
> + dev->idle_stat.entry_start, NSEC_PER_USEC);
Is the conversion really necessary?
If so, then why?
And if there is a good reason, what about using right shift to do
an approximate conversion to avoid the extra division here?
> + diff = overhead - dev->idle_stat.overhead;
> + dev->idle_stat.overhead += diff >> 3;
Can you please explain what happens in the two lines above?
> + /*
> + * limit overhead to 1us
> + */
> + if (dev->idle_stat.overhead == 0)
> + dev->idle_stat.overhead = 1;
> + }
> +}
> +
> /**
> * cpuidle_install_idle_handler - installs the cpuidle idle loop handler
> */
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuidle.h b/include/linux/cpuidle.h
> index fc1e5d7..cad9b71 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpuidle.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpuidle.h
> @@ -72,6 +72,15 @@ struct cpuidle_device_kobj;
> struct cpuidle_state_kobj;
> struct cpuidle_driver_kobj;
>
> +struct cpuidle_stat {
> + u64 entry_start; /* nanosecond */
> + u64 entry_end; /* nanosecond */
> + u64 overhead; /* nanosecond */
> + unsigned int predicted_us; /* microsecond */
> + bool predicted; /* ever predicted? */
> + bool fast_idle; /* fast idle? */
Some of the fields here are never used in the code after this patch.
Also it would be good to add a comment describing the meaning of the
fields.
> +};
> +
> struct cpuidle_device {
> unsigned int registered:1;
> unsigned int enabled:1;
> @@ -89,6 +98,7 @@ struct cpuidle_device {
> cpumask_t coupled_cpus;
> struct cpuidle_coupled *coupled;
> #endif
> + struct cpuidle_stat idle_stat;
> };
>
> DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct cpuidle_device *, cpuidle_devices);
> @@ -131,6 +141,8 @@ extern bool cpuidle_not_available(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
>
> extern int cpuidle_select(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> struct cpuidle_device *dev);
> +extern void cpuidle_entry_start(void);
> +extern void cpuidle_entry_end(void);
> extern int cpuidle_enter(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index);
> extern void cpuidle_reflect(struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index);
> @@ -164,6 +176,8 @@ static inline bool cpuidle_not_available(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> static inline int cpuidle_select(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> struct cpuidle_device *dev)
> {return -ENODEV; }
> +static inline void cpuidle_entry_start(void) { }
> +static inline void cpuidle_entry_end(void) { }
> static inline int cpuidle_enter(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index)
> {return -ENODEV; }
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle.c b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> index 6c23e30..0951dac 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> @@ -210,6 +210,12 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
> static void do_idle(void)
> {
> /*
> + * we record idle entry overhead now, so any deferrable items
> + * in idle entry path need to be placed between cpuidle_entry_start()
> + * and cpuidle_entry_end()
> + */
> + cpuidle_entry_start();
> + /*
> * If the arch has a polling bit, we maintain an invariant:
> *
> * Our polling bit is clear if we're not scheduled (i.e. if rq->curr !=
> @@ -217,10 +223,10 @@ static void do_idle(void)
> * then setting need_resched is guaranteed to cause the CPU to
> * reschedule.
> */
> -
> __current_set_polling();
> quiet_vmstat();
> tick_nohz_idle_enter();
> + cpuidle_entry_end();
>
> while (!need_resched()) {
> check_pgt_cache();
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-14 0:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-30 7:20 [RFC PATCH v2 0/8] Introduct cpu idle prediction functionality Aubrey Li
2017-09-30 7:20 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/8] cpuidle: menu: extract " Aubrey Li
2017-10-14 0:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-16 2:46 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-09-30 7:20 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/8] cpuidle: record the overhead of idle entry Aubrey Li
2017-10-14 0:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2017-10-16 3:11 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-10-17 0:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-17 7:04 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-09-30 7:20 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/8] cpuidle: add a new predict interface Aubrey Li
2017-10-14 0:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-16 8:04 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-10-14 1:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-16 9:52 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-09-30 7:20 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/8] tick/nohz: keep tick on for a fast idle Aubrey Li
2017-10-14 0:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-16 3:26 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-10-16 4:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-10-16 5:34 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-10-16 6:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2017-10-16 6:31 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-09-30 7:20 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/8] timers: keep sleep length updated as needed Aubrey Li
2017-10-14 0:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-16 6:46 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-10-16 23:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-17 6:10 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-09-30 7:20 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/8] cpuidle: make fast idle threshold tunable Aubrey Li
2017-10-14 0:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-16 6:00 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-10-17 0:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-17 6:12 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-09-30 7:20 ` [RFC PATCH v2 7/8] cpuidle: introduce irq timing to make idle prediction Aubrey Li
2017-10-14 1:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-16 6:03 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-09-30 7:20 ` [RFC PATCH v2 8/8] cpuidle: introduce run queue average idle " Aubrey Li
2017-10-14 1:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-14 1:14 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/8] Introduct cpu idle prediction functionality Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-16 7:44 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-10-17 0:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-17 7:32 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-11-30 1:00 ` Li, Aubrey
2017-11-30 1:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2672521.fEEa1b19Vu@aspire.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®