All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: kernel: initialize broadcast hrtimer based clock event device
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 17:48:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140529164855.GH24233@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140529142912.GB20798@red-moon>

On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 03:29:12PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 01:39:29PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > > The side effect of having a CPU always-on has implications on power management
> > > > platform capabilities and makes CPUidle suboptimal, since at least a CPU is
> > > > kept always in a shallow idle state by the kernel to relay timer interrupts,
> > > > but at least leaves the kernel with a functional system with some working power
> > > > management capabilities.
> > > > 
> > > > The hrtimer based clock event device has lowest possible rating so that,
> > > > if a platform contains a functional HW clock event device with broadcast
> > > > capabilities, that device is always chosen as a tick broadcast device instead
> > > > of the software based one, now present by default.
> > > 
> > > I think this statement "instead of the software based one, now present
> > > by default" is incorrect. The hrtimer based clock event device will come
> > > into picture only when the arch calls tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast()
> > > explicitly. Otherwise either the arch should register a real clock
> > > device which does broadcast or should disable deep idle states where the
> > > local timers stop. So I would suggest skipping the last paragraph as it
> > > is not conveying anything in specific. The fact that a clock device with
> > > the highest rating will be chosen is already known and need not be
> > > mentioned explicitly IMHO.
> > 
> > I think it is worth keeping the paragraph to allay anyone's fear that
> > the hrtimer based broadcast device might be selected in preference to a
> > real suitable clock. I would otherwise not be aware that the hrtimer
> > based broadcast device had the lowest rating (and would have to go and
> > look that up separately).
> > 
> > As the arch code has delegated timer registration to
> > clocksoruce_of_init, it doesn't know whether any of the real devices
> > that may have been registered are suitable as a broadcast source for
> > oneshot events. So we can't conditionally register the hrtimer based
> > broadcast device.
> > 
> > Perhaps we could replace "now present by default" with "which is
> > unconditionally registered in case no suitable hardware device is
> > present"?
> 
> How about this:
> 
> -- >8 --
> Subject: [PATCH] arm64: kernel: initialize broadcast hrtimer based clock event
>  device
> 
> On platforms implementing CPU power management, the CPUidle subsystem
> can allow CPUs to enter idle states where local timers logic is lost on power
> down. To keep the software timers functional the kernel relies on an
> always-on broadcast timer to be present in the platform to relay the
> interrupt signalling the timer expiries.
> 
> For platforms implementing CPU core gating that do not implement an always-on
> HW timer or implement it in a broken way, this patch adds code to initialize
> the kernel hrtimer based clock event device upon boot (which can be chosen as
> tick broadcast device by the kernel).
> It relies on a dynamically chosen CPU to be always powered-up. This CPU then
> relays the timer interrupt to CPUs in deep-idle states through its HW local
> timer device.
> 
> The side effect of having a CPU always-on has implications on power management
> platform capabilities and makes CPUidle suboptimal, since at least a CPU is
> kept always in a shallow idle state by the kernel to relay timer interrupts,
> but at least leaves the kernel with a functional system with some working power
> management capabilities.

I think "The side effect of" is redundant, but otherwise this is fine.

> 
> The hrtimer based clock event device has lowest possible rating so that,
> if a platform contains a functional HW clock event device with broadcast
> capabilities, that device is always chosen as a tick broadcast device instead
> of the hrtimer based one, which is unconditionally registered in case no
> suitable hardware clock event device is present.

The last paragaph jumps back and forward a bit. How about:

The hrtimer based clock event device is unconditionally registered, but
has the lowest possible rating such that any broadcast-capable HW clock
event device present will be chosen in preference as the tick broadcast
device.

Cheers,
Mark.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: kernel: initialize broadcast hrtimer based clock event device
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 17:48:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140529164855.GH24233@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140529142912.GB20798@red-moon>

On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 03:29:12PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 01:39:29PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > > The side effect of having a CPU always-on has implications on power management
> > > > platform capabilities and makes CPUidle suboptimal, since at least a CPU is
> > > > kept always in a shallow idle state by the kernel to relay timer interrupts,
> > > > but at least leaves the kernel with a functional system with some working power
> > > > management capabilities.
> > > > 
> > > > The hrtimer based clock event device has lowest possible rating so that,
> > > > if a platform contains a functional HW clock event device with broadcast
> > > > capabilities, that device is always chosen as a tick broadcast device instead
> > > > of the software based one, now present by default.
> > > 
> > > I think this statement "instead of the software based one, now present
> > > by default" is incorrect. The hrtimer based clock event device will come
> > > into picture only when the arch calls tick_setup_hrtimer_broadcast()
> > > explicitly. Otherwise either the arch should register a real clock
> > > device which does broadcast or should disable deep idle states where the
> > > local timers stop. So I would suggest skipping the last paragraph as it
> > > is not conveying anything in specific. The fact that a clock device with
> > > the highest rating will be chosen is already known and need not be
> > > mentioned explicitly IMHO.
> > 
> > I think it is worth keeping the paragraph to allay anyone's fear that
> > the hrtimer based broadcast device might be selected in preference to a
> > real suitable clock. I would otherwise not be aware that the hrtimer
> > based broadcast device had the lowest rating (and would have to go and
> > look that up separately).
> > 
> > As the arch code has delegated timer registration to
> > clocksoruce_of_init, it doesn't know whether any of the real devices
> > that may have been registered are suitable as a broadcast source for
> > oneshot events. So we can't conditionally register the hrtimer based
> > broadcast device.
> > 
> > Perhaps we could replace "now present by default" with "which is
> > unconditionally registered in case no suitable hardware device is
> > present"?
> 
> How about this:
> 
> -- >8 --
> Subject: [PATCH] arm64: kernel: initialize broadcast hrtimer based clock event
>  device
> 
> On platforms implementing CPU power management, the CPUidle subsystem
> can allow CPUs to enter idle states where local timers logic is lost on power
> down. To keep the software timers functional the kernel relies on an
> always-on broadcast timer to be present in the platform to relay the
> interrupt signalling the timer expiries.
> 
> For platforms implementing CPU core gating that do not implement an always-on
> HW timer or implement it in a broken way, this patch adds code to initialize
> the kernel hrtimer based clock event device upon boot (which can be chosen as
> tick broadcast device by the kernel).
> It relies on a dynamically chosen CPU to be always powered-up. This CPU then
> relays the timer interrupt to CPUs in deep-idle states through its HW local
> timer device.
> 
> The side effect of having a CPU always-on has implications on power management
> platform capabilities and makes CPUidle suboptimal, since at least a CPU is
> kept always in a shallow idle state by the kernel to relay timer interrupts,
> but at least leaves the kernel with a functional system with some working power
> management capabilities.

I think "The side effect of" is redundant, but otherwise this is fine.

> 
> The hrtimer based clock event device has lowest possible rating so that,
> if a platform contains a functional HW clock event device with broadcast
> capabilities, that device is always chosen as a tick broadcast device instead
> of the hrtimer based one, which is unconditionally registered in case no
> suitable hardware clock event device is present.

The last paragaph jumps back and forward a bit. How about:

The hrtimer based clock event device is unconditionally registered, but
has the lowest possible rating such that any broadcast-capable HW clock
event device present will be chosen in preference as the tick broadcast
device.

Cheers,
Mark.

  reply	other threads:[~2014-05-29 16:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-29  9:23 [PATCH] arm64: kernel: initialize broadcast hrtimer based clock event device Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-05-29  9:23 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-05-29 10:14 ` Will Deacon
2014-05-29 10:14   ` Will Deacon
2014-05-29 11:04 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-05-29 11:04   ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-05-29 12:39   ` Mark Rutland
2014-05-29 12:39     ` Mark Rutland
2014-05-29 14:29     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-05-29 14:29       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-05-29 16:48       ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2014-05-29 16:48         ` Mark Rutland
2014-05-30  5:54     ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-05-30  5:54       ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-05-29 14:25   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-05-29 14:25     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi

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=20140529164855.GH24233@leverpostej \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.