From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030952AbbD1N6o (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Apr 2015 09:58:44 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:59315 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030385AbbD1N6l (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Apr 2015 09:58:41 -0400 Message-ID: <553F920D.6090404@arm.com> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 14:58:37 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" CC: Linus Walleij , Sudeep Holla , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Daniel Lezcano , Linux PM list , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/20] sched/idle: Use explicit broadcast oneshot control function References: <2112147.0kYCHhbEJT@vostro.rjw.lan> <8051605.iKEaLUIlGb@vostro.rjw.lan> <4162206.ldgadmp1aL@vostro.rjw.lan> <21687949.Wq8byZT4f8@vostro.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <21687949.Wq8byZT4f8@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 28/04/15 15:14, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 03:37:44 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 03:31:54 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 02:37:10 PM Linus Walleij wrote: >>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>> Sudeep: >>>>>> At-least I observed issue only when I am using hardware broadcast timer. >>>>>> It doesn't hang when I am using hrtimer as broadcast timer in which case >>>>>> one of the cpu will be not enter deeper idle states that lose timer. >>>>>> I will rerun on v4.1-rc1 and post the complete log. >>>>> >>>>> So the bug here is that cpuidle_enter() enables interrupts, so the >>>>> assumption about them being not enabled made by >>>>> tick_broadcast_oneshot_control() is actually not valid. >>>>> >>>>> It looks like we need to acquire the clockevents_lock at least in this >>>>> particular case. Let me see where to put it and I'll send a patch for >>>>> testing. >>>> >>>> Aha that looks very much like it. Put me on the patch and I'll >>>> take it for a spin. >>> >>> OK, so something like the below for starters (the _irqsave variant is used to >>> avoid adding one more WARN_ON(irqs_disabled()) in there). >>> >>> I haven't tested it, but then I can't reproduce the original issue in the >>> first place. >> >> Of course, the whole "broadcast" thing could be done from cpuidle_enter() >> in the first place, but then we could not avoid the problem with the cpuidle >> *callback* enabling interrupts possibly in there anyway (not to mention the >> "coupled" stuff). > > That said, if the given state is marked with CPUIDLE_FLAG_TIMER_STOP, I really > wouldn't expect it to re-enable interrupts on exit and the "coupled" thing > seems to be fundamentally at odds with that flag either. > > So it should be possible to move the "broadcast" logic into the cpuidle layer, > which I'm going to try to do. > Makes sense. > Please test the patch I've sent, though, as it should bring the code back to > where it was before the clockevents_notify() removal and it'd be good to verify > that. > I tested your patch and it works now. Anyways I am continuing to run stress tests on my board. I will report if I find any issues. Regards, Sudeep