From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F5881DA622; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 04:43:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737693817; cv=none; b=bOwT2T3jsLqPPC1aFaEbqvLWKCnnAytROiYHqmVCfdabCbrpVPOGJryst3I9IRad35Ad4G0zSi/lZl9flo/stIjdlK3YSy/jmRjF8NHafm3KqwGOj79UFywpxcploUhXQKZ4pRkhRmDMJW+VaEZ6psZSkXv4Vu9NNDIgpApkULA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737693817; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oXWlxy89SZ6kqYejlFPHHR+ILJatGaXSItW71m23ypA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=E22m00YVOpClDGGZgj9LciJN5w/SM2bB4IU+Gt7Zjvuv8uh9ZNP70sdc9/HQ8OaNr1rNqUb4FmsVwz51/yH03fY85eroEHvoXgyyaKh7jvSzcj8vlcebtkxHDQAliMyFekLfETSRsrA3qEt4P33MIcCsosl8y/PJe/frhUcTwx4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b=R7/V3+qS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="R7/V3+qS" Received: from [100.79.193.133] (unknown [4.194.122.162]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 587782109A4D; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 20:43:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 587782109A4D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1737693815; bh=QKFTMq+hnBTZnKp36KmBoZtDRC/OW8f8R/+Z8qZPaAU=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=R7/V3+qSr0OQfR/J1vW+FSrLbRjpPFu0F+UUsldIlli3fhu6edaCEvHPoQIjwhhlY WLWF5MECEWqCCx7suk84F0ierfNQ/OqCtdYgJpnCcOLq2tsGWJ6kL26fiY/8h7S5MN 66VOaynimLozQnwQwYi25fSs/hD4evh4QoTRENm4= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:13:30 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/5] arm64: Provide an AMU-based version of arch_freq_get_on_cpu To: Beata Michalska , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, ionela.voinescu@arm.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com, will@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, rafael@kernel.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org Cc: sumitg@nvidia.com, yang@os.amperecomputing.com, vanshikonda@os.amperecomputing.com, lihuisong@huawei.com, zhanjie9@hisilicon.com References: <20250121084435.2839280-1-beata.michalska@arm.com> <20250121084435.2839280-5-beata.michalska@arm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Prasanna Kumar T S M In-Reply-To: <20250121084435.2839280-5-beata.michalska@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 21-01-2025 14:14, Beata Michalska wrote: > With the Frequency Invariance Engine (FIE) being already wired up with > sched tick and making use of relevant (core counter and constant > counter) AMU counters, getting the average frequency for a given CPU, > can be achieved by utilizing the frequency scale factor which reflects > an average CPU frequency for the last tick period length. > > The solution is partially based on APERF/MPERF implementation of > arch_freq_get_on_cpu. > > Suggested-by: Ionela Voinescu > Signed-off-by: Beata Michalska > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > index cb180684d10d..5f5738b174c7 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > > #include > #include > @@ -88,18 +89,28 @@ int __init parse_acpi_topology(void) > * initialized. > */ > static DEFINE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(unsigned long, arch_max_freq_scale) = 1UL << (2 * SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT); > -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u64, arch_const_cycles_prev); > -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u64, arch_core_cycles_prev); > static cpumask_var_t amu_fie_cpus; > > +struct amu_cntr_sample { > + u64 arch_const_cycles_prev; > + u64 arch_core_cycles_prev; > + unsigned long last_scale_update; > +}; > + > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(struct amu_cntr_sample, cpu_amu_samples); > + > void update_freq_counters_refs(void) > { > - this_cpu_write(arch_core_cycles_prev, read_corecnt()); > - this_cpu_write(arch_const_cycles_prev, read_constcnt()); > + struct amu_cntr_sample *amu_sample = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_amu_samples); > + > + amu_sample->arch_core_cycles_prev = read_corecnt(); > + amu_sample->arch_const_cycles_prev = read_constcnt(); > } > > static inline bool freq_counters_valid(int cpu) > { > + struct amu_cntr_sample *amu_sample = per_cpu_ptr(&cpu_amu_samples, cpu); > + > if ((cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) || !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpu_present_mask)) > return false; > > @@ -108,8 +119,8 @@ static inline bool freq_counters_valid(int cpu) > return false; > } > > - if (unlikely(!per_cpu(arch_const_cycles_prev, cpu) || > - !per_cpu(arch_core_cycles_prev, cpu))) { > + if (unlikely(!amu_sample->arch_const_cycles_prev || > + !amu_sample->arch_core_cycles_prev)) { > pr_debug("CPU%d: cycle counters are not enabled.\n", cpu); > return false; > } > @@ -152,17 +163,22 @@ void freq_inv_set_max_ratio(int cpu, u64 max_rate) > > static void amu_scale_freq_tick(void) > { > + struct amu_cntr_sample *amu_sample = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_amu_samples); > u64 prev_core_cnt, prev_const_cnt; > u64 core_cnt, const_cnt, scale; > > - prev_const_cnt = this_cpu_read(arch_const_cycles_prev); > - prev_core_cnt = this_cpu_read(arch_core_cycles_prev); > + prev_const_cnt = amu_sample->arch_const_cycles_prev; > + prev_core_cnt = amu_sample->arch_core_cycles_prev; > > update_freq_counters_refs(); > > - const_cnt = this_cpu_read(arch_const_cycles_prev); > - core_cnt = this_cpu_read(arch_core_cycles_prev); > + const_cnt = amu_sample->arch_const_cycles_prev; > + core_cnt = amu_sample->arch_core_cycles_prev; > > + /* > + * This should not happen unless the AMUs have been reset and the > + * counter values have not been restored - unlikely > + */ > if (unlikely(core_cnt <= prev_core_cnt || > const_cnt <= prev_const_cnt)) > return; > @@ -182,6 +198,8 @@ static void amu_scale_freq_tick(void) > > scale = min_t(unsigned long, scale, SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE); > this_cpu_write(arch_freq_scale, (unsigned long)scale); > + > + amu_sample->last_scale_update = jiffies; > } > > static struct scale_freq_data amu_sfd = { > @@ -189,6 +207,77 @@ static struct scale_freq_data amu_sfd = { > .set_freq_scale = amu_scale_freq_tick, > }; > > +static __always_inline bool amu_fie_cpu_supported(unsigned int cpu) > +{ > + return cpumask_available(amu_fie_cpus) && > + cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, amu_fie_cpus); > +} > + > +#define AMU_SAMPLE_EXP_MS 20 > + > +int arch_freq_get_on_cpu(int cpu) > +{ > + struct amu_cntr_sample *amu_sample; > + unsigned int start_cpu = cpu; > + unsigned long last_update; > + unsigned int freq = 0; > + u64 scale; > + > + if (!amu_fie_cpu_supported(cpu) || !arch_scale_freq_ref(cpu)) > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + > +retry: > + amu_sample = per_cpu_ptr(&cpu_amu_samples, cpu); > + > + last_update = amu_sample->last_scale_update; > + > + /* > + * For those CPUs that are in full dynticks mode, or those that have > + * not seen tick for a while, try an alternative source for the counters > + * (and thus freq scale), if available, for given policy: this boils > + * down to identifying an active cpu within the same freq domain, if any. > + */ > + if (!housekeeping_cpu(cpu, HK_TYPE_TICK) || > + time_is_before_jiffies(last_update + msecs_to_jiffies(AMU_SAMPLE_EXP_MS))) { > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > + int ref_cpu = cpu; > + > + if (!policy) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + if (!cpumask_intersects(policy->related_cpus, > + housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK))) { > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + } > + > + > + do { > + ref_cpu = cpumask_next_wrap(ref_cpu, policy->cpus, > + start_cpu, false); > + > + } while (ref_cpu < nr_cpu_ids && idle_cpu(ref_cpu)); > + > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); > + > + if (ref_cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) > + /* No alternative to pull info from */ > + return -EAGAIN; > + > + cpu = ref_cpu; > + goto retry; If you are going to spin a new revision, can you use while loop instead of using goto for looping? This will help improve the readability. > + } > + /* > + * Reversed computation to the one used to determine > + * the arch_freq_scale value > + * (see amu_scale_freq_tick for details) > + */ > + scale = arch_scale_freq_capacity(cpu); > + freq = scale * arch_scale_freq_ref(cpu); > + freq >>= SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT; > + return freq; > +} > + > static void amu_fie_setup(const struct cpumask *cpus) > { > int cpu;