mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: ulf.hansson@linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, khilman@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] cpuidle: consolidate calls to time capture
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 12:04:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <669fe03f-0d65-8ca9-53dc-1323e0397c53@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2605374.f08NWHE4iP@kreacher>


Hi Rafael,

On 18/03/2020 11:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, March 16, 2020 10:08:43 PM CET Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> A few years ago, we changed the code in cpuidle to replace ktime_get()
>> by a local_clock() to get rid of potential seq lock in the path and an
>> extra latency.
>>
>> Meanwhile, the code evolved and we are getting the time in some other
>> places like the power domain governor and in the future break even
>> deadline proposal.
> 
> Hmm?
> 
> Have any patches been posted for that?

https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/3/11/1113

https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/3/13/466

but there is no consensus yet if that has a benefit or not.

>> Unfortunately, as the time must be compared across the CPU, we have no
>> other option than using the ktime_get() again. Hopefully, we can
>> factor out all the calls to local_clock() and ktime_get() into a
>> single one when the CPU is entering idle as the value will be reuse in
>> different places.
> 
> So there are cases in which it is not necessary to synchronize the time
> between CPUs and those would take the overhead unnecessarily.
> 
> This change looks premature to me at least.

The idea is to call one time ktime_get() when entering idle and store
the result in the struct cpuidle_device, so we have the information when
we entered idle.

Moreover, ktime_get() is called in do_idle() via:

tick_nohz_idle_enter()
  tick_nohz_start_idle()
    ts->idle_entrytime = ktime_get();

This is called at the first loop level. The idle loop is exiting and
re-entering again without passing through tick_nohz_idle_enter() in the
second loop level in case of interrupt processing, thus the
idle_entrytime is not updated and the return of
tick_nohz_get_sleep_length() will be greater than what is expected.

May be we can consider ktime_get_mono_fast_ns() which is lockless with a
particular care of the non-monotonic aspect if needed. Given the
description at [1] the time jump could a few nanoseconds in case of NMI.

The local_clock() can no be inspected across CPUs, the gap is too big
and continues to increase during system lifetime.

[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/kernel/time/timekeeping.c#n396


-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog


  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-18 11:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-16 21:08 Daniel Lezcano
2020-03-18 10:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-03-18 11:04   ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2020-03-18 14:32     ` Daniel Lezcano
2020-03-18 21:29       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-03-18 10:49 ` Ulf Hansson

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=669fe03f-0d65-8ca9-53dc-1323e0397c53@linaro.org \
    --to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=khilman@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.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®