From: Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: rui.zhang@intel.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, john.stultz@linaro.org,
leo.yan@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal/drivers/step_wise: Fix temperature regulation misbehavior
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 20:05:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170908030513.GC2755@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1504681126-30751-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 08:58:46AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> There is a particular situation when the cooling device is cpufreq and the heat
> dissipation is not efficient enough where the temperature increases little by
> little until reaching the critical threshold and leading to a SoC reset.
>
> The behavior is reproducible on a hikey6220 with bad heat dissipation (eg.
> stacked with other boards).
>
> Running a simple C program doing while(1); for each CPU of the SoC makes the
> temperature to reach the passive regulation trip point and ends up to the
> maximum allowed temperature followed by a reset.
>
> What is observed is a ping pong between two cpu frequencies, 1.2GHz and 900MHz
> while the temperature continues to grow.
>
> It appears the step wise governor calls get_target_state() the first time with
> the throttle set to true and the trend to 'raising'. The code selects logically
> the next state, so the cpu frequency decreases from 1.2GHz to 900MHz, so far so
> good. The temperature decreases immediately but still stays greater than the
> trip point, then get_target_state() is called again, this time with the
> throttle set to true *and* the trend to 'dropping'. From there the algorithm
> assumes we have to step down the state and the cpu frequency jumps back to
> 1.2GHz. But the temperature is still higher than the trip point, so
> get_target_state() is called with throttle=1 and trend='raising' again, we jump
> to 900MHz, then get_target_state() is called with throttle=1 and
> trend='dropping', we jump to 1.2GHz, etc ... but the temperature does not
> stabilizes and continues to increase.
>
> Keeping the next_target untouched when 'throttle' is true at 'dropping' time
> fixes the issue.
Can you maybe elaborate a bit more on "fixes the issue"? May be worth
adding to the commit message a log of thermal trace events showing which
cooling states the step wise governor chooses before and after your
change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/thermal/step_wise.c | 8 +++++---
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c b/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
> index be95826..a01259a 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
> @@ -94,9 +94,11 @@ static unsigned long get_target_state(struct thermal_instance *instance,
> if (!throttle)
> next_target = THERMAL_NO_TARGET;
> } else {
> - next_target = cur_state - 1;
> - if (next_target > instance->upper)
> - next_target = instance->upper;
> + if (!throttle) {
> + next_target = cur_state - 1;
> + if (next_target > instance->upper)
> + next_target = instance->upper;
> + }
> }
> break;
> case THERMAL_TREND_DROP_FULL:
> --
> 2.7.4
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-08 3:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-06 6:58 [PATCH] thermal/drivers/step_wise: Fix temperature regulation misbehavior Daniel Lezcano
2017-09-08 3:05 ` Eduardo Valentin [this message]
2017-09-08 9:05 ` [PATCH V2] " Daniel Lezcano
2017-09-08 9:49 ` Keerthy
2017-09-08 9:51 ` Keerthy
2017-09-08 11:47 ` Daniel Lezcano
2017-09-08 12:25 ` Keerthy
2017-09-08 13:59 ` Daniel Lezcano
2017-09-08 14:12 ` [PATCH V3] " Daniel Lezcano
2017-09-11 10:04 ` Keerthy
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=20170908030513.GC2755@localhost.localdomain \
--to=edubezval@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=leo.yan@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).