All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	rjw@rjwysocki.net, nicolas.pitre@linaro.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] idle/cpuidle: Split cpuidle_idle_call main function into smaller functions
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:37:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52FB6B23.5090901@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52FB4F1D.9030303@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On 02/12/2014 11:38 AM, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On 02/11/2014 08:41 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> In order to allow better integration between the cpuidle framework and the
>> scheduler, reducing the distance between these two sub-components will
>> facilitate this integration by moving part of the cpuidle code in the idle
>> task file and, because idle.c is in the sched directory, we have access to
>> the scheduler's private structures.
>>
>> This patch splits the cpuidle_idle_call main entry function into 3 calls
>> to a newly added API:
>>   1. select the idle state
>>   2. enter the idle state
>>   3. reflect the idle state
>>
>> The cpuidle_idle_call calls these three functions to implement the main
>> idle entry function.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c |  102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>   include/linux/cpuidle.h   |   14 +++++++
>>   2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
>> index a55e68f..172ab6a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
>> @@ -108,6 +108,71 @@ int cpuidle_enter_state(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
>>   }
>>
>>   /**
>> + * cpuidle_select - ask the cpuidle framework to choose an idle state
>> + *
>> + * @drv: the cpuidle driver
>> + * @dev: the cpuidle device
>> + *
>> + * Returns the index of the idle state. On error it returns:
>> + * -NODEV : the cpuidle framework is not available
>> + * -EBUSY : the cpuidle framework is not initialized
>> + */
>> +int cpuidle_select(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	if (off || !initialized)
>> +		return -ENODEV;
>> +
>> +	if (!drv || !dev || !dev->enabled)
>> +		return -EBUSY;
>
> I would suggest moving the above two conditions under another function,
> cpuidle_enabled() maybe? The reason is, cpuidle_select() indicates that,
> it is invoked to select an idle state. While you are expecting this
> function to return an idle state, it seems counter-intuitive to return a
> ENODEV/EBUSY. This function is expected to be a call into the governor
> specific code and the same function should not be used to verify if
> cpuidle is enabled/not IMHO.

Yes, I fully agree. I will fix that.

>> +
>> +	return cpuidle_curr_governor->select(drv, dev);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * cpuidle_enter - enter into the specified idle state
>> + *
>> + * @drv:   the cpuidle driver tied with the cpu
>> + * @dev:   the cpuidle device
>> + * @index: the index in the idle state table
>> + *
>> + * Returns the index in the idle state, < 0 in case of error.
>> + * The error code depends on the backend driver
>> + */
>> +int cpuidle_enter(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev,
>> +		  int index)
>> +{
>> +	int entered_state;
>> +	bool broadcast = !!(drv->states[index].flags & CPUIDLE_FLAG_TIMER_STOP);
>> +
>> +	if (broadcast)
>> +		clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_BROADCAST_ENTER, &dev->cpu);
>> +
>> +	if (cpuidle_state_is_coupled(dev, drv, index))
>> +		entered_state = cpuidle_enter_state_coupled(dev, drv, index);
>> +	else
>> +		entered_state = cpuidle_enter_state(dev, drv, index);
>> +
>> +	if (broadcast)
>> +		clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_BROADCAST_EXIT, &dev->cpu);
>
> The tip tree, timers/core branch has the patch,
> tick: Introduce hrtimer based broadcast. In the problem scenario that
> this patchset is addressing, the call to broadcast framework may return
> an error indicating that the idle state in question cannot be entered
> into. I wanted to bring it to your notice, so that early on you can take
> care of this. You will need to add code below in the invocation of
> cpuidle_enter() to verify if the idle state was entered into or not. If
> it was not, then you will need to skip tracing and reflecting of the
> idle state and directly exit the cpuidle loop with a failed status.

Ok.

Thanks !


-- 
  <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:[~2014-02-12 12:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-02-11 15:11 [PATCH 1/5] idle/cpuidle: Split cpuidle_idle_call main function into smaller functions Daniel Lezcano
2014-02-11 15:11 ` [PATCH 2/5] cpuidle/idle: Move the cpuidle_idle_call function to idle.c Daniel Lezcano
2014-02-12 10:43   ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-02-12 12:35     ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-02-11 15:11 ` [PATCH 3/5] idle: Reorganize the idle loop Daniel Lezcano
2014-02-11 17:36   ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-02-12 11:00   ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-02-12 12:45     ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-02-11 15:11 ` [PATCH 4/5] idle: Move idle conditions in cpuidle_idle main function Daniel Lezcano
2014-02-11 15:11 ` [PATCH 5/5] idle: Add more comments to the code Daniel Lezcano
2014-02-11 17:51   ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-02-11 21:52     ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-02-11 17:27 ` [PATCH 1/5] idle/cpuidle: Split cpuidle_idle_call main function into smaller functions Nicolas Pitre
2014-02-12 10:38 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-02-12 12:37   ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]

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=52FB6B23.5090901@linaro.org \
    --to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.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 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.