linux-pm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: rjw@rjwysocki.net
Cc: nicolas.pitre@linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
	linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org
Subject: [PATCH V2 5/5] cpuidle: menu: Move the update function before its declaration
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 11:01:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1414054881-17713-5-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1414054881-17713-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>

In order to prevent a pointless forward declaration, just move the function
at the beginning of the file.

This patch does not change the behavior of the governor, it is just code
reordering.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c | 149 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
index 6ae8390..0ac76b1 100644
--- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
+++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
@@ -184,7 +184,6 @@ static inline int performance_multiplier(unsigned long nr_iowaiters, unsigned lo
 
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct menu_device, menu_devices);
 
-static void menu_update(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev);
 
 /* This implements DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST but avoids 64 bit division */
 static u64 div_round64(u64 dividend, u32 divisor)
@@ -192,6 +191,80 @@ static u64 div_round64(u64 dividend, u32 divisor)
 	return div_u64(dividend + (divisor / 2), divisor);
 }
 
+/**
+ * menu_update - attempts to guess what happened after entry
+ * @drv: cpuidle driver containing state data
+ * @dev: the CPU
+ */
+static void menu_update(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev)
+{
+	struct menu_device *data = &__get_cpu_var(menu_devices);
+	int last_idx = data->last_state_idx;
+	struct cpuidle_state *target = &drv->states[last_idx];
+	unsigned int measured_us;
+	unsigned int new_factor;
+
+	/*
+	 * Try to figure out how much time passed between entry to low
+	 * power state and occurrence of the wakeup event.
+	 *
+	 * If the entered idle state didn't support residency measurements,
+	 * we are basically lost in the dark how much time passed.
+	 * As a compromise, assume we slept for the whole expected time.
+	 *
+	 * Any measured amount of time will include the exit latency.
+	 * Since we are interested in when the wakeup begun, not when it
+	 * was completed, we must subtract the exit latency. However, if
+	 * the measured amount of time is less than the exit latency,
+	 * assume the state was never reached and the exit latency is 0.
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(!(target->flags & CPUIDLE_FLAG_TIME_VALID))) {
+		/* Use timer value as is */
+		measured_us = data->next_timer_us;
+
+	} else {
+		/* Use measured value */
+		measured_us = cpuidle_get_last_residency(dev);
+
+		/* Deduct exit latency */
+		if (measured_us > target->exit_latency)
+			measured_us -= target->exit_latency;
+
+		/* Make sure our coefficients do not exceed unity */
+		if (measured_us > data->next_timer_us)
+			measured_us = data->next_timer_us;
+	}
+
+	/* Update our correction ratio */
+	new_factor = data->correction_factor[data->bucket];
+	new_factor -= new_factor / DECAY;
+
+	if (data->next_timer_us > 0 && measured_us < MAX_INTERESTING)
+		new_factor += RESOLUTION * measured_us / data->next_timer_us;
+	else
+		/*
+		 * we were idle so long that we count it as a perfect
+		 * prediction
+		 */
+		new_factor += RESOLUTION;
+
+	/*
+	 * We don't want 0 as factor; we always want at least
+	 * a tiny bit of estimated time. Fortunately, due to rounding,
+	 * new_factor will stay nonzero regardless of measured_us values
+	 * and the compiler can eliminate this test as long as DECAY > 1.
+	 */
+	if (DECAY == 1 && unlikely(new_factor == 0))
+		new_factor = 1;
+
+	data->correction_factor[data->bucket] = new_factor;
+
+	/* update the repeating-pattern data */
+	data->intervals[data->interval_ptr++] = measured_us;
+	if (data->interval_ptr >= INTERVALS)
+		data->interval_ptr = 0;
+}
+
 /*
  * Try detecting repeating patterns by keeping track of the last 8
  * intervals, and checking if the standard deviation of that set
@@ -378,80 +451,6 @@ static void menu_reflect(struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index)
 }
 
 /**
- * menu_update - attempts to guess what happened after entry
- * @drv: cpuidle driver containing state data
- * @dev: the CPU
- */
-static void menu_update(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev)
-{
-	struct menu_device *data = &__get_cpu_var(menu_devices);
-	int last_idx = data->last_state_idx;
-	struct cpuidle_state *target = &drv->states[last_idx];
-	unsigned int measured_us;
-	unsigned int new_factor;
-
-	/*
-	 * Try to figure out how much time passed between entry to low
-	 * power state and occurrence of the wakeup event.
-	 *
-	 * If the entered idle state didn't support residency measurements,
-	 * we are basically lost in the dark how much time passed.
-	 * As a compromise, assume we slept for the whole expected time.
-	 *
-	 * Any measured amount of time will include the exit latency.
-	 * Since we are interested in when the wakeup begun, not when it
-	 * was completed, we must subtract the exit latency. However, if
-	 * the measured amount of time is less than the exit latency,
-	 * assume the state was never reached and the exit latency is 0.
-	 */
-	if (unlikely(!(target->flags & CPUIDLE_FLAG_TIME_VALID))) {
-		/* Use timer value as is */
-		measured_us = data->next_timer_us;
-
-	} else {
-		/* Use measured value */
-		measured_us = cpuidle_get_last_residency(dev);
-
-		/* Deduct exit latency */
-		if (measured_us > target->exit_latency)
-			measured_us -= target->exit_latency;
-
-		/* Make sure our coefficients do not exceed unity */
-		if (measured_us > data->next_timer_us)
-			measured_us = data->next_timer_us;
-	}
-
-	/* Update our correction ratio */
-	new_factor = data->correction_factor[data->bucket];
-	new_factor -= new_factor / DECAY;
-
-	if (data->next_timer_us > 0 && measured_us < MAX_INTERESTING)
-		new_factor += RESOLUTION * measured_us / data->next_timer_us;
-	else
-		/*
-		 * we were idle so long that we count it as a perfect
-		 * prediction
-		 */
-		new_factor += RESOLUTION;
-
-	/*
-	 * We don't want 0 as factor; we always want at least
-	 * a tiny bit of estimated time. Fortunately, due to rounding,
-	 * new_factor will stay nonzero regardless of measured_us values
-	 * and the compiler can eliminate this test as long as DECAY > 1.
-	 */
-	if (DECAY == 1 && unlikely(new_factor == 0))
-		new_factor = 1;
-
-	data->correction_factor[data->bucket] = new_factor;
-
-	/* update the repeating-pattern data */
-	data->intervals[data->interval_ptr++] = measured_us;
-	if (data->interval_ptr >= INTERVALS)
-		data->interval_ptr = 0;
-}
-
-/**
  * menu_enable_device - scans a CPU's states and does setup
  * @drv: cpuidle driver
  * @dev: the CPU
-- 
1.9.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-10-23  9:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-23  9:01 [PATCH V2 1/5] sched: idle: cpuidle: Check the latency req before idle Daniel Lezcano
2014-10-23  9:01 ` [PATCH V2 2/5] sched: idle: Get the next timer event and pass it the cpuidle framework Daniel Lezcano
2014-10-23  9:01 ` [PATCH V2 3/5] cpuidle: idle: menu: Don't reflect when a state selection failed Daniel Lezcano
2014-10-28  2:01   ` Len Brown
2014-10-28 19:15     ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-10-28  7:01   ` Preeti Murthy
2014-10-28 18:28     ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-10-29  1:44       ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-10-29 16:54       ` Kevin Hilman
2014-10-29 21:11         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-10-23  9:01 ` [PATCH V2 4/5] cpuidle: menu: Fix the get_typical_interval Daniel Lezcano
2014-10-23 16:43   ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-10-28  2:48   ` Len Brown
2014-10-29 18:15     ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-10-23  9:01 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2014-10-23 16:47   ` [PATCH V2 5/5] cpuidle: menu: Move the update function before its declaration Nicolas Pitre
2014-10-28  2:53     ` Len Brown
2014-10-28  3:51 ` [PATCH V2 1/5] sched: idle: cpuidle: Check the latency req before idle Preeti Murthy
2014-10-28 18:59   ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-10-29  2:01     ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-11-05 14:28       ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-11-06  4:08         ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-11-06 12:27           ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-11-07  4:23             ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-11-06 13:42           ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-11-07  4:29             ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-11-07  9:35               ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-11-05 21:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-11-05 21:41   ` Daniel Lezcano

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=1414054881-17713-5-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
    --cc=patches@linaro.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).