Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
	"catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>
Cc: "kstewart@linuxfoundation.org" <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org" <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"wuyun.wu@huawei.com" <wuyun.wu@huawei.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: psci: Use udelay() instead of msleep() to reduce waiting time
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:26:20 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bf4ab998-00af-1638-0ab4-64f3ea02568c@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18c9fd22d72d4ea1a11e800e8873dd8d@AcuMS.aculab.com>



On 2019/9/12 16:48, David Laight wrote:
> From: Yunfeng Ye
>> Sent: 11 September 2019 09:50
>> We want to reduce the time of cpu_down() for saving power, found that
>> cpu_psci_cpu_kill() cost 10ms after psci_ops.affinity_info() fail.
>>
>> Normally the time cpu dead is very short, it is no need to wait 10ms.
>> so use udelay 10us to instead msleep 10ms in every waiting loop, and add
>> cond_resched() to give a chance to run a higher-priority process.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/kernel/psci.c | 6 +++---
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/psci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/psci.c
>> index 85ee7d0..9e9d8a6 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/psci.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/psci.c
>> @@ -86,15 +86,15 @@ static int cpu_psci_cpu_kill(unsigned int cpu)
>>  	 * while it is dying. So, try again a few times.
>>  	 */
>>
>> -	for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
>> +	for (i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
>>  		err = psci_ops.affinity_info(cpu_logical_map(cpu), 0);
>>  		if (err == PSCI_0_2_AFFINITY_LEVEL_OFF) {
>>  			pr_info("CPU%d killed.\n", cpu);
>>  			return 0;
>>  		}
>>
>> -		msleep(10);
>> -		pr_info("Retrying again to check for CPU kill\n");
>> +		cond_resched();
>> +		udelay(10);
> 
> You really don't want to be doing 10000 udelay(10) before giving up.
> 
> If udelay(10) is long enough for the normal case, then do that once.
> After that use usleep_range().
> > 	David
> 
Thanks for your advice. the delay depend on the num of cores, range
from 50us to 500us, I have test the time on the 140+ cores cpu:

  (10us every time)
  [ 1177.979642] psci: CPU1 killed. total wait 4 times
  [ 1178.011369] psci: CPU2 killed. total wait 6 times
  [ 1178.035247] psci: CPU3 killed. total wait 3 times
  [ 1178.071134] psci: CPU4 killed. total wait 8 times
  ......
  [ 1190.128202] psci: CPU139 killed. total wait 50 times
  [ 1190.156266] psci: CPU140 killed. total wait 48 times
  [ 1190.192082] psci: CPU141 killed. total wait 46 times
  [ 1190.224104] psci: CPU142 killed. total wait 46 times

Can I bust-wait 1ms,which is 100 tiems udelay(10), after that, use
usleep_range(1000, 10000) ?  I don't want other process occupy cpu
for a long time when I let out the cpu. thanks.

> -
> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
> 


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

      reply	other threads:[~2019-09-16 15:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-11  8:50 [PATCH] arm64: psci: Use udelay() instead of msleep() to reduce waiting time Yunfeng Ye
2019-09-12  8:48 ` David Laight
2019-09-16 15:26   ` Yunfeng Ye [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=bf4ab998-00af-1638-0ab4-64f3ea02568c@huawei.com \
    --to=yeyunfeng@huawei.com \
    --cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=wuyun.wu@huawei.com \
    /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