From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
sboyd@codeaurora.org, prarit@redhat.com,
Srivatsa Bhat <srivatsa@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 2/6] cpufreq: Stop migrating sysfs files on hotplug
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 17:20:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <557782C5.2030305@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6922a02c439f353c7c2bc3f09f7eae6dfbc3ea25.1433767914.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
On 06/08/2015 05:55 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> When we hot-unplug a cpu, we remove its sysfs cpufreq directory and if
> the outgoing cpu was the owner of policy->kobj earlier then we migrate
> the sysfs directory to under another online cpu.
>
> There are few disadvantages this brings:
> - Code Complexity
> - Slower hotplug/suspend/resume
> - sysfs file permissions are reset after all policy->cpus are offlined
> - CPUFreq stats history lost after all policy->cpus are offlined
> - Special management of sysfs stuff during suspend/resume
>
> To overcome these, this patch modifies the way sysfs directories are
> managed:
> - Select sysfs kobjects owner while initializing policy and don't change
> it during hotplugs. Track it with kobj_cpu created earlier.
>
> - Create symlinks for all related CPUs (can be offline) instead of
> affected CPUs on policy initialization and remove them only when the
> policy is freed.
>
> - Free policy structure only on the removal of cpufreq-driver and not
> during hotplug/suspend/resume, detected by checking 'struct
> subsys_interface *' (Valid only when called from
> subsys_interface_unregister() while unregistering driver).
>
> Apart from this, special care is taken to handle physical hoplug of CPUs
> as we wouldn't remove sysfs links or remove policies on logical
> hotplugs. Physical hotplug happens in the following sequence.
>
> Hot removal:
> - CPU is offlined first, ~ 'echo 0 >
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online'
> - Then its device is removed along with all sysfs files, cpufreq core
> notified with cpufreq_remove_dev() callback from subsys-interface..
>
> Hot addition:
> - First the device along with its sysfs files is added, cpufreq core
> notified with cpufreq_add_dev() callback from subsys-interface..
> - CPU is onlined, ~ 'echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online'
>
> We call the same routines with both hotplug and subsys callbacks, and we
> sense physical hotplug with cpu_offline() check in subsys callback. We
> can handle most of the stuff with regular hotplug callback paths and
> add/remove cpufreq sysfs links or free policy from subsys callbacks.
>
> [ Something similar attempted by Saravana earlier ]
Full name and email would be nice.
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 223 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 138 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 7eeff892c0a6..663a934259a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -957,28 +957,64 @@ void cpufreq_sysfs_remove_file(const struct attribute *attr)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpufreq_sysfs_remove_file);
>
> -/* symlink affected CPUs */
> +static int add_cpu_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, int cpu)
> +{
> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> +
> + pr_debug("%s: Adding symlink for CPU: %u\n", __func__, cpu);
> +
> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> + if (WARN_ON(!cpu_dev))
> + return 0;
> +
> + return sysfs_create_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, &policy->kobj, "cpufreq");
> +}
> +
> +static void remove_cpu_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, int cpu)
> +{
> + struct device *cpu_dev;
> +
> + pr_debug("%s: Removing symlink for CPU: %u\n", __func__, cpu);
> +
> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> + if (WARN_ON(!cpu_dev))
> + return;
> +
> + sysfs_remove_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
> +}
> +
> +/* Add/remove symlinks for all related CPUs */
> static int cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> {
> unsigned int j;
> int ret = 0;
>
> - for_each_cpu(j, policy->cpus) {
> - struct device *cpu_dev;
> -
> + /* Some related CPUs might not be present (physically hotplugged) */
> + for_each_cpu_and(j, policy->related_cpus, cpu_present_mask) {
> if (j == policy->kobj_cpu)
> continue;
>
> - pr_debug("Adding link for CPU: %u\n", j);
> - cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(j);
> - ret = sysfs_create_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, &policy->kobj,
> - "cpufreq");
> + ret = add_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, j);
> if (ret)
> break;
> }
> +
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static void cpufreq_remove_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> +{
> + unsigned int j;
> +
> + /* Some related CPUs might not be present (physically hotplugged) */
> + for_each_cpu_and(j, policy->related_cpus, cpu_present_mask) {
> + if (j == policy->kobj_cpu)
> + continue;
> +
> + remove_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, j);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static int cpufreq_add_dev_interface(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> struct device *dev)
> {
> @@ -1075,7 +1111,7 @@ static int cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> }
> }
>
> - return sysfs_create_link(&dev->kobj, &policy->kobj, "cpufreq");
> + return 0;
> }
>
> static struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_policy_restore(unsigned int cpu)
> @@ -1095,7 +1131,7 @@ static struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_policy_restore(unsigned int cpu)
> return policy;
> }
>
> -static struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_policy_alloc(void)
> +static struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_policy_alloc(int cpu)
> {
> struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>
> @@ -1116,6 +1152,11 @@ static struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_policy_alloc(void)
> init_completion(&policy->kobj_unregister);
> INIT_WORK(&policy->update, handle_update);
>
> + policy->cpu = cpu;
> +
> + /* Set this once on allocation */
> + policy->kobj_cpu = cpu;
> +
> return policy;
>
> err_free_cpumask:
> @@ -1134,10 +1175,11 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> blocking_notifier_call_chain(&cpufreq_policy_notifier_list,
> CPUFREQ_REMOVE_POLICY, policy);
>
> - down_read(&policy->rwsem);
> + down_write(&policy->rwsem);
> + cpufreq_remove_dev_symlink(policy);
> kobj = &policy->kobj;
> cmp = &policy->kobj_unregister;
> - up_read(&policy->rwsem);
> + up_write(&policy->rwsem);
> kobject_put(kobj);
>
> /*
> @@ -1168,27 +1210,14 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> kfree(policy);
> }
>
> -static int update_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu,
> - struct device *cpu_dev)
> +static void update_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu)
> {
> - int ret;
> -
> if (WARN_ON(cpu == policy->cpu))
Can you remind me again why this is a warning? Would we still need this
check?
> - return 0;
> -
> - /* Move kobject to the new policy->cpu */
> - ret = kobject_move(&policy->kobj, &cpu_dev->kobj);
> - if (ret) {
> - pr_err("%s: Failed to move kobj: %d\n", __func__, ret);
> - return ret;
> - }
> + return;
>
> down_write(&policy->rwsem);
> policy->cpu = cpu;
> - policy->kobj_cpu = cpu;
> up_write(&policy->rwsem);
> -
> - return 0;
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -1206,13 +1235,25 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
> int ret = -ENOMEM;
> struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> unsigned long flags;
> - bool recover_policy = cpufreq_suspended;
> -
> - if (cpu_is_offline(cpu))
> - return 0;
> + bool recover_policy = !sif;
The policy is always going to be there, so calling it "recover_policy"
is kinda confusing. But I can't suggest a better name now.
>
> pr_debug("adding CPU %u\n", cpu);
>
> + /*
> + * Only possible if 'cpu' wasn't physically present earlier and we are
> + * here from subsys_interface add callback. A hotplug notifier will
> + * follow and we will handle it like logical CPU hotplug then. For now,
> + * just create the sysfs link.
> + */
> + if (cpu_is_offline(cpu)) {
My changes were on an older code base, so things might have changed by
now. But at this location, there was definitely a case where I had to
check for "sif" before creating symlinks. I need to think a bit more to
remember what that reason was and see if you have to do it too.
I'll try to respond more later. But I just wanted to send out what I
could when I have little time to review this.
-Saravana
> + policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu);
> + /* No need to create link of the first cpu of a policy */
> + if (!policy)
> + return 0;
> +
> + return add_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, cpu);
> + }
> +
> if (!down_read_trylock(&cpufreq_rwsem))
> return 0;
>
> @@ -1232,7 +1273,7 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
> policy = recover_policy ? cpufreq_policy_restore(cpu) : NULL;
> if (!policy) {
> recover_policy = false;
> - policy = cpufreq_policy_alloc();
> + policy = cpufreq_policy_alloc(cpu);
> if (!policy)
> goto nomem_out;
> }
> @@ -1243,12 +1284,8 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
> * the creation of a brand new one. So we need to perform this update
> * by invoking update_policy_cpu().
> */
> - if (recover_policy && cpu != policy->cpu) {
> - WARN_ON(update_policy_cpu(policy, cpu, dev));
> - } else {
> - policy->cpu = cpu;
> - policy->kobj_cpu = cpu;
> - }
> + if (recover_policy && cpu != policy->cpu)
> + update_policy_cpu(policy, cpu);
>
> cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, cpumask_of(cpu));
>
> @@ -1427,29 +1464,14 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev,
> CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN);
> up_write(&policy->rwsem);
>
> - if (cpu != policy->kobj_cpu) {
> - sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
> - } else if (cpus > 1) {
> - /* Nominate new CPU */
> - int new_cpu = cpumask_any_but(policy->cpus, cpu);
> - struct device *cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(new_cpu);
> -
> - sysfs_remove_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
> - ret = update_policy_cpu(policy, new_cpu, cpu_dev);
> - if (ret) {
> - if (sysfs_create_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, &policy->kobj,
> - "cpufreq"))
> - pr_err("%s: Failed to restore kobj link to cpu:%d\n",
> - __func__, cpu_dev->id);
> - return ret;
> - }
> + if (cpu != policy->cpu)
> + return 0;
>
> - if (!cpufreq_suspended)
> - pr_debug("%s: policy Kobject moved to cpu: %d from: %d\n",
> - __func__, new_cpu, cpu);
> - } else if (cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu) {
> + if (cpus > 1)
> + /* Nominate new CPU */
> + update_policy_cpu(policy, cpumask_any_but(policy->cpus, cpu));
> + else if (cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu)
> cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu(policy);
> - }
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -1470,32 +1492,11 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(struct device *dev,
> cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus);
> up_write(&policy->rwsem);
>
> - /* If cpu is last user of policy, free policy */
> - if (policy_is_inactive(policy)) {
> - if (has_target()) {
> - ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy,
> - CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT);
> - if (ret) {
> - pr_err("%s: Failed to exit governor\n",
> - __func__);
> - return ret;
> - }
> - }
> -
> - if (!cpufreq_suspended)
> - cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(policy);
> + /* Not the last cpu of policy, start governor again ? */
> + if (!policy_is_inactive(policy)) {
> + if (!has_target())
> + return 0;
>
> - /*
> - * Perform the ->exit() even during light-weight tear-down,
> - * since this is a core component, and is essential for the
> - * subsequent light-weight ->init() to succeed.
> - */
> - if (cpufreq_driver->exit)
> - cpufreq_driver->exit(policy);
> -
> - if (!cpufreq_suspended)
> - cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
> - } else if (has_target()) {
> ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_START);
> if (!ret)
> ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS);
> @@ -1504,8 +1505,34 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(struct device *dev,
> pr_err("%s: Failed to start governor\n", __func__);
> return ret;
> }
> +
> + return 0;
> }
>
> + /* If cpu is last user of policy, free policy */
> + if (has_target()) {
> + ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT);
> + if (ret) {
> + pr_err("%s: Failed to exit governor\n", __func__);
> + return ret;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* Free the policy kobjects only if the driver is getting removed. */
> + if (sif)
> + cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(policy);
> +
> + /*
> + * Perform the ->exit() even during light-weight tear-down,
> + * since this is a core component, and is essential for the
> + * subsequent light-weight ->init() to succeed.
> + */
> + if (cpufreq_driver->exit)
> + cpufreq_driver->exit(policy);
> +
> + if (sif)
> + cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -1519,8 +1546,34 @@ static int cpufreq_remove_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
> unsigned int cpu = dev->id;
> int ret;
>
> - if (cpu_is_offline(cpu))
> + /*
> + * Only possible if 'cpu' is getting physically removed now. A hotplug
> + * notifier should have already been called and we just need to remove
> + * link or free policy here.
> + */
> + if (cpu_is_offline(cpu)) {
> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu);
> + struct cpumask mask;
> +
> + if (!policy)
> + return 0;
> +
> + cpumask_copy(&mask, policy->related_cpus);
> + cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &mask);
> +
> + /*
> + * Free policy only if all policy->related_cpus are removed
> + * physically.
> + */
> + if (cpumask_intersects(&mask, cpu_present_mask)) {
> + remove_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, cpu);
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(policy);
> + cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
> return 0;
> + }
>
> ret = __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(dev, sif);
>
>
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-10 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-08 12:55 [PATCH V7 0/6] cpufreq: Don't loose cpufreq history on CPU hotplug Viresh Kumar
2015-06-08 12:55 ` [PATCH V7 1/6] cpufreq: Don't allow updating inactive policies from sysfs Viresh Kumar
2015-06-08 23:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-06-09 2:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-09 21:50 ` Saravana Kannan
2015-06-08 12:55 ` [PATCH V7 2/6] cpufreq: Stop migrating sysfs files on hotplug Viresh Kumar
2015-06-08 23:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-06-09 2:50 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-10 0:20 ` Saravana Kannan [this message]
2015-06-10 2:19 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-10 23:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-06-08 12:55 ` [PATCH V7 3/6] cpufreq: Initialize policy->kobj while allocating policy Viresh Kumar
2015-06-08 12:55 ` [PATCH V7 4/6] cpufreq: Call cpufreq_policy_put_kobj() from cpufreq_policy_free() Viresh Kumar
2015-06-08 12:55 ` [PATCH V7 5/6] cpufreq: Restart governor as soon as possible Viresh Kumar
2015-06-08 23:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-06-09 3:09 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-06-08 12:55 ` [PATCH V7 6/6] cpufreq: Remove cpufreq_update_policy() Viresh Kumar
2015-06-08 23:17 ` [PATCH V7 0/6] cpufreq: Don't loose cpufreq history on CPU hotplug Rafael J. Wysocki
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=557782C5.2030305@codeaurora.org \
--to=skannan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=srivatsa@mit.edu \
--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 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).