From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
rafael@kernel.org
Cc: rui.zhang@intel.com, amit.kucheria@verdurent.com,
amit.kachhap@gmail.com, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org,
viresh.kumar@linaro.org, len.brown@intel.com, pavel@ucw.cz,
Pierre.Gondois@arm.com, ionela.voinescu@arm.com,
mhiramat@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/12] PM: EM: Add RCU mechanism which safely cleans the old data
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 15:06:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e324df5d-a4c1-43f3-5e45-95dc591085ac@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230721155022.2339982-10-lukasz.luba@arm.com>
On 21/07/2023 17:50, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> The EM is going to support runtime modifications of the power data.
> Introduce RCU safe mechanism to clean up the old allocated EM data.
> It also adds a mutex for the EM structure to serialize the modifiers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
> ---
> kernel/power/energy_model.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/power/energy_model.c b/kernel/power/energy_model.c
> index c2f8a0046f8a..4596bfe7398e 100644
> --- a/kernel/power/energy_model.c
> +++ b/kernel/power/energy_model.c
> @@ -23,6 +23,9 @@
> */
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(em_pd_mutex);
>
> +static void em_cpufreq_update_efficiencies(struct device *dev,
> + struct em_perf_state *table);
> +
> static bool _is_cpu_device(struct device *dev)
> {
> return (dev->bus == &cpu_subsys);
> @@ -104,6 +107,45 @@ static void em_debug_create_pd(struct device *dev) {}
> static void em_debug_remove_pd(struct device *dev) {}
> #endif
>
> +static void em_destroy_rt_table_rcu(struct rcu_head *rp)
> +{
> + struct em_perf_table *runtime_table;
> +
> + runtime_table = container_of(rp, struct em_perf_table, rcu);
> + kfree(runtime_table->state);
> + kfree(runtime_table);
> +}
> +
> +static void em_destroy_tmp_setup_rcu(struct rcu_head *rp)
> +{
> + struct em_perf_table *runtime_table;
> +
> + runtime_table = container_of(rp, struct em_perf_table, rcu);
> + kfree(runtime_table);
> +}
Still don't like that we have to have 2 rcu callbacks here. In case we
could assign default_table to runtime_table in em_create_pd() (and not
just default_table->state to runtime_table->state) IMHO we would only
need one rcu callback?
-->8--
-static void em_destroy_tmp_setup_rcu(struct rcu_head *rp)
-{
- struct em_perf_table *runtime_table;
-
- runtime_table = container_of(rp, struct em_perf_table, rcu);
- kfree(runtime_table);
-}
-
static void em_perf_runtime_table_set(struct device *dev,
struct em_perf_table *runtime_table)
{
@@ -136,13 +128,8 @@ static void em_perf_runtime_table_set(struct device *dev,
em_cpufreq_update_efficiencies(dev, runtime_table->state);
- /*
- * Check if the 'state' array is not actually the one from setup.
- * If it is then don't free it.
- */
- if (tmp->state == pd->default_table->state)
- call_rcu(&tmp->rcu, em_destroy_tmp_setup_rcu);
- else
+ /* Don't free default table (inital value of runtime table) */
+ if (tmp != pd->default_table)
call_rcu(&tmp->rcu, em_destroy_rt_table_rcu);
}
@@ -349,7 +336,6 @@ static int em_create_pd(struct device *dev, int nr_states,
unsigned long flags)
{
struct em_perf_table *default_table;
- struct em_perf_table *runtime_table;
struct em_perf_domain *pd;
struct device *cpu_dev;
int cpu, ret, num_cpus;
@@ -382,24 +368,15 @@ static int em_create_pd(struct device *dev, int nr_states,
pd->default_table = default_table;
- runtime_table = kzalloc(sizeof(*runtime_table), GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!runtime_table) {
- kfree(default_table);
- kfree(pd);
- return -ENOMEM;
- }
-
ret = em_create_perf_table(dev, pd, nr_states, cb, flags);
if (ret) {
kfree(default_table);
- kfree(runtime_table);
kfree(pd);
return ret;
}
- /* Re-use temporally (till 1st modification) the memory */
- runtime_table->state = default_table->state;
- rcu_assign_pointer(pd->runtime_table, runtime_table);
+ /* Initialize runtime table as default table */
+ rcu_assign_pointer(pd->runtime_table, default_table);
if (_is_cpu_device(dev))
for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-16 13:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-21 15:50 [PATCH v3 00/12] Introduce runtime modifiable Energy Model Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 01/12] PM: EM: Refactor em_cpufreq_update_efficiencies() arguments Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 02/12] PM: EM: Find first CPU online while updating OPP efficiency Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 03/12] PM: EM: Refactor em_pd_get_efficient_state() to be more flexible Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 04/12] PM: EM: Refactor a new function em_compute_costs() Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 05/12] PM: EM: Check if the get_cost() callback is present in em_compute_costs() Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 06/12] PM: EM: Refactor struct em_perf_domain and add default_table Lukasz Luba
2023-08-16 13:04 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-08-21 15:22 ` Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 07/12] PM: EM: Add update_power() callback for runtime modifications Lukasz Luba
2023-08-16 13:04 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-08-21 15:23 ` Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 08/12] PM: EM: Introduce runtime modifiable table Lukasz Luba
2023-08-16 13:05 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-08-21 15:25 ` Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 09/12] PM: EM: Add RCU mechanism which safely cleans the old data Lukasz Luba
2023-08-16 13:06 ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2023-08-21 15:30 ` Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 10/12] PM: EM: Add runtime update interface to modify EM power Lukasz Luba
2023-08-16 13:07 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-08-21 15:33 ` Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 11/12] PM: EM: Use runtime modified EM for CPUs energy estimation in EAS Lukasz Luba
2023-07-21 15:50 ` [PATCH v3 12/12] Documentation: EM: Update with runtime modification design Lukasz Luba
2023-08-16 13:08 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-08-21 16:13 ` Lukasz Luba
2023-08-16 13:00 ` [PATCH v3 00/12] Introduce runtime modifiable Energy Model Dietmar Eggemann
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=e324df5d-a4c1-43f3-5e45-95dc591085ac@arm.com \
--to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=Pierre.Gondois@arm.com \
--cc=amit.kachhap@gmail.com \
--cc=amit.kucheria@verdurent.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=viresh.kumar@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®