mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Thomas Ilsche <thomas.ilsche@tu-dresden.de>,
	Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>,
	Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] cpuidle: poll_state: Add time limit to poll_idle()
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2018 23:34:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5810003.D8QGLjubHr@aspire.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1522008952.6308.46.camel@surriel.com>

On Sunday, March 25, 2018 10:15:52 PM CEST Rik van Riel wrote:
> 
> --=-e8yLbs0aoH4SrxOskwwl
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> On Thu, 2018-03-22 at 18:09 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >=20
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c
> > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/sched/idle.h>
> > =20
> >  #define POLL_IDLE_TIME_LIMIT	(TICK_NSEC / 16)
> > +#define POLL_IDLE_COUNT		1000
> > =20
> >  static int __cpuidle poll_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
> >  			       struct cpuidle_driver *drv, int
> > index)
> > @@ -18,9 +19,14 @@ static int __cpuidle poll_idle(struct cp
> > =20
> >  	local_irq_enable();
> >  	if (!current_set_polling_and_test()) {
> > +		unsigned int loop_count =3D 0;
> > +
> >  		while (!need_resched()) {
> >  			cpu_relax();
> > +			if (loop_count++ < POLL_IDLE_COUNT)
> > +				continue;
> > =20
> > +			loop_count =3D 0;
> >  			if (local_clock() - time_start >
> > POLL_IDLE_TIME_LIMIT)
> >  				break;
> >  		}
> 
> OK, I am still seeing a performance
> degradation with the above, though
> not throughout the entire workload.
> 
> It appears that making the idle loop
> do anything besides cpu_relax() for
> a significant amount of time slows
> things down.

I see.

> I plan to try two more things:
> 
> 1) Disable polling on SMT systems, with
>    the idea that putting one thread to
>    sleep with monitor/mwait in C1 will
>    allow the other thread to run faster.

Sounds plausible.

> 2) Insert more cpu_relax() calls into the
>    main loop, so the CPU core spends more
>    of its time in cpu_relax() and less
>    time doing other things:

Well, maybe it's a matter of doing cpu_relax() between any other bits of
significant computation in there:


---
 drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c |   13 ++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
 #include <linux/sched/idle.h>
 
 #define POLL_IDLE_TIME_LIMIT	(TICK_NSEC / 16)
+#define POLL_IDLE_COUNT		200
 
 static int __cpuidle poll_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
 			       struct cpuidle_driver *drv, int index)
@@ -18,11 +19,21 @@ static int __cpuidle poll_idle(struct cp
 
 	local_irq_enable();
 	if (!current_set_polling_and_test()) {
+		unsigned int loop_count = 0;
+
 		while (!need_resched()) {
 			cpu_relax();
-
+			if (loop_count++ < POLL_IDLE_COUNT) {
+				cpu_relax();
+				continue;
+			}
+			cpu_relax();
+			loop_count = 0;
+			cpu_relax();
 			if (local_clock() - time_start > POLL_IDLE_TIME_LIMIT)
 				break;
+
+			cpu_relax();
 		}
 	}
 	current_clr_polling();

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-25 21:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-14 14:08 Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-22 16:32 ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-22 17:09   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-22 17:19     ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-22 17:24       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-25 20:15     ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-25 21:34       ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2018-03-25 21:45         ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-26  5:59         ` Doug Smythies
2018-03-26  7:13         ` Doug Smythies
2018-03-26  9:35           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-26 16:32         ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-26 21:44           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-26 21:48             ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-27 17:59     ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-27 21:06       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-14 15:00 Doug Smythies
2018-03-20 10:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-25  0:28 Doug Smythies
2018-03-25 11:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-25 21:41   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-26  6:01 ` Doug Smythies

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=5810003.D8QGLjubHr@aspire.rjw.lan \
    --to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dsmythies@telus.net \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgalbraith@suse.de \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thomas.ilsche@tu-dresden.de \
    /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®