All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>
Cc: "Chanwoo Choi" <cw00.choi@samsung.com>,
	"Matthias Kaehlcke" <mka@chromium.org>,
	"Kyungmin Park" <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
	"MyungJoo Ham" <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>,
	"Artur Świgoń" <a.swigon@partner.samsung.com>,
	"Saravana Kannan" <saravanak@google.com>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"Alexandre Bailon" <abailon@baylibre.com>,
	"Georgi Djakov" <georgi.djakov@linaro.org>,
	"Jacky Bai" <ping.bai@nxp.com>,
	"Viresh Kumar" <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	"NXP Linux Team" <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] PM / devfreq: Add dev_pm_qos support with minimal changes
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 11:46:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5794906.l6Fuony6qs@kreacher> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1574179738.git.leonard.crestez@nxp.com>

On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:12:12 PM CET Leonard Crestez wrote:
> Add dev_pm_qos notifiers to devfreq core in order to support frequency
> limits via dev_pm_qos_add_request.
> 
> Unlike the rest of devfreq the dev_pm_qos frequency is measured in kHz,
> this is consistent with current dev_pm_qos usage for cpufreq and
> allows frequencies above 2Ghz (pm_qos expresses limits as s32).
> 
> Like with cpufreq the handling of min_freq/max_freq is moved to the
> dev_pm_qos mechanism. Constraints from userspace are no longer clamped on
> store, instead all values can be written and we only check against OPPs in a
> new devfreq_get_freq_range function. This is consistent with the design of
> dev_pm_qos.
> 
> Notifiers from pm_qos are executed under a single global dev_pm_qos_mtx and
> need to take devfreq->lock, this means that calls into dev_pm_qos while holding
> devfreq->lock are not allowed (lockdep warns about possible deadlocks).
> 
> Fix this by only adding the qos request and notifiers after devfreq->lock is
> released inside devfreq_add_device. In theory this means sysfs writes
> are possible before the min/max requests are initialized so we guard
> against that explictly. The dev_pm_qos_update_request function would
> otherwise print a big WARN splat.
> 
> Alternatively devfreq initialization could be refactored to avoid taking
> devfreq->lock but that requires several intricate changes:
> 
> 	https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11242865/
> 
> I considered making dev_pm_qos call notifiers outside the lock but
> that's another complex refactoring and it's difficult to ensure
> correctness. If two identical qos requests are made in parallel then the
> second shouldn't return until all notifiers are completely executed for
> the first and QOS is enforced; otherwise it mostly defeats the purpose
> of making proactive requests.
> 
> This series implements the minimal changes in order to implement dev_pm_qos
> support for devfreq. It only costs a little defensive programming.
> 
> This series is also marked as [RFC] because it depends on restoring
> DEV_PM_QOS_MIN/MAX_FREQUENCY inside the pm core:
> 
> 	https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11250413/
> 
> ---
> Changes since "big version" v10:
> * Drop accepted cleanups
> * Work with current locking approach (split cleanups into other series)
> * Drop acks and deliberately relabel as a new series. It still incorporates
> most previous discussion but takes a different approach to locking.
> * Don't print errors if devfreq_dev_release is called on error cleanup from
> devfreq_add_device, just accept that requests and notifiers might not be
> registered yet. I wish dev_pm_qos cleanups behaved like standard "kfree" and
> silently did nothing when there's nothing to be done.
> Link to v10: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/list/?series=196443
> 
> Leonard Crestez (2):
>   PM / devfreq: Add PM QoS support
>   PM / devfreq: Use PM QoS for sysfs min/max_freq
> 
>  drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c | 151 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  include/linux/devfreq.h   |  14 +++-
>  2 files changed, 145 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

Please resend this series as non-RFC with the ACKs from Chanwoo included.

It may still be viable to push it for 5.5 during the -rc period.

Thanks!




WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>
Cc: "Artur Świgoń" <a.swigon@partner.samsung.com>,
	"Jacky Bai" <ping.bai@nxp.com>,
	"Saravana Kannan" <saravanak@google.com>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	"Viresh Kumar" <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	"NXP Linux Team" <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"Chanwoo Choi" <cw00.choi@samsung.com>,
	"Kyungmin Park" <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
	"Matthias Kaehlcke" <mka@chromium.org>,
	"MyungJoo Ham" <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>,
	"Georgi Djakov" <georgi.djakov@linaro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	"Alexandre Bailon" <abailon@baylibre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] PM / devfreq: Add dev_pm_qos support with minimal changes
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 11:46:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5794906.l6Fuony6qs@kreacher> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1574179738.git.leonard.crestez@nxp.com>

On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:12:12 PM CET Leonard Crestez wrote:
> Add dev_pm_qos notifiers to devfreq core in order to support frequency
> limits via dev_pm_qos_add_request.
> 
> Unlike the rest of devfreq the dev_pm_qos frequency is measured in kHz,
> this is consistent with current dev_pm_qos usage for cpufreq and
> allows frequencies above 2Ghz (pm_qos expresses limits as s32).
> 
> Like with cpufreq the handling of min_freq/max_freq is moved to the
> dev_pm_qos mechanism. Constraints from userspace are no longer clamped on
> store, instead all values can be written and we only check against OPPs in a
> new devfreq_get_freq_range function. This is consistent with the design of
> dev_pm_qos.
> 
> Notifiers from pm_qos are executed under a single global dev_pm_qos_mtx and
> need to take devfreq->lock, this means that calls into dev_pm_qos while holding
> devfreq->lock are not allowed (lockdep warns about possible deadlocks).
> 
> Fix this by only adding the qos request and notifiers after devfreq->lock is
> released inside devfreq_add_device. In theory this means sysfs writes
> are possible before the min/max requests are initialized so we guard
> against that explictly. The dev_pm_qos_update_request function would
> otherwise print a big WARN splat.
> 
> Alternatively devfreq initialization could be refactored to avoid taking
> devfreq->lock but that requires several intricate changes:
> 
> 	https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11242865/
> 
> I considered making dev_pm_qos call notifiers outside the lock but
> that's another complex refactoring and it's difficult to ensure
> correctness. If two identical qos requests are made in parallel then the
> second shouldn't return until all notifiers are completely executed for
> the first and QOS is enforced; otherwise it mostly defeats the purpose
> of making proactive requests.
> 
> This series implements the minimal changes in order to implement dev_pm_qos
> support for devfreq. It only costs a little defensive programming.
> 
> This series is also marked as [RFC] because it depends on restoring
> DEV_PM_QOS_MIN/MAX_FREQUENCY inside the pm core:
> 
> 	https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11250413/
> 
> ---
> Changes since "big version" v10:
> * Drop accepted cleanups
> * Work with current locking approach (split cleanups into other series)
> * Drop acks and deliberately relabel as a new series. It still incorporates
> most previous discussion but takes a different approach to locking.
> * Don't print errors if devfreq_dev_release is called on error cleanup from
> devfreq_add_device, just accept that requests and notifiers might not be
> registered yet. I wish dev_pm_qos cleanups behaved like standard "kfree" and
> silently did nothing when there's nothing to be done.
> Link to v10: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/list/?series=196443
> 
> Leonard Crestez (2):
>   PM / devfreq: Add PM QoS support
>   PM / devfreq: Use PM QoS for sysfs min/max_freq
> 
>  drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c | 151 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  include/linux/devfreq.h   |  14 +++-
>  2 files changed, 145 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

Please resend this series as non-RFC with the ACKs from Chanwoo included.

It may still be viable to push it for 5.5 during the -rc period.

Thanks!




_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-12-04 10:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-19 16:12 [PATCH RFC 0/2] PM / devfreq: Add dev_pm_qos support with minimal changes Leonard Crestez
2019-11-19 16:12 ` Leonard Crestez
2019-11-19 16:12 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] PM / devfreq: Add PM QoS support Leonard Crestez
2019-11-19 16:12   ` Leonard Crestez
2019-12-02  1:13   ` Chanwoo Choi
2019-12-02  1:13     ` Chanwoo Choi
2019-11-19 16:12 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] PM / devfreq: Use PM QoS for sysfs min/max_freq Leonard Crestez
2019-11-19 16:12   ` Leonard Crestez
2019-11-21 23:16   ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2019-11-21 23:16     ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2019-11-25 16:46     ` Leonard Crestez
2019-11-25 16:46       ` Leonard Crestez
2019-12-02  1:18   ` Chanwoo Choi
2019-12-02  1:18     ` Chanwoo Choi
2019-12-04 10:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2019-12-04 10:46   ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] PM / devfreq: Add dev_pm_qos support with minimal changes Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-12-05  0:52   ` Chanwoo Choi
2019-12-05  0:52     ` Chanwoo Choi

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=5794906.l6Fuony6qs@kreacher \
    --to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=a.swigon@partner.samsung.com \
    --cc=abailon@baylibre.com \
    --cc=cw00.choi@samsung.com \
    --cc=georgi.djakov@linaro.org \
    --cc=krzk@kernel.org \
    --cc=kyungmin.park@samsung.com \
    --cc=leonard.crestez@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mka@chromium.org \
    --cc=myungjoo.ham@samsung.com \
    --cc=ping.bai@nxp.com \
    --cc=saravanak@google.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 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.