From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
X86 Kernel <x86@kernel.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] powercap/rapl: reduce ipi calls
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 22:49:47 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1601132203190.3575@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160113121003.3e9c2108@yairi>
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016, Jacob Pan wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 20:16:22 +0100
> Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:21:38AM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote:
> > > static int cpufreq_p4_setdc(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int newstate)
> > > {
> > > ...
> > >
> > > rdmsr_on_cpu(cpu, MSR_IA32_THERM_CONTROL, &l, &h);
> > > if (newstate == DC_DISABLE) {
> > > pr_debug("CPU#%d disabling modulation\n", cpu);
> > > wrmsr_on_cpu(cpu, MSR_IA32_THERM_CONTROL, l &
> > > ~(1<<4), h); } else {
> > > pr_debug("CPU#%d setting duty cycle to %d%%\n",
> > > cpu, ((125 * newstate) / 10));
> > > /* bits 63 - 5 : reserved
> > > * bit 4 : enable/disable
> > > * bits 3-1 : duty cycle
> > > * bit 0 : reserved
> > > */
> > > l = (l & ~14);
> > > l = l | (1<<4) | ((newstate & 0x7)<<1);
> > > wrmsr_on_cpu(cpu, MSR_IA32_THERM_CONTROL, l, h);
> > > }
> >
> > This cannot be converted because you need to do the stuff between the
> > rdmsr_on_cpu() and wrmsr_on_cpu() calls.
> >
> it can be converted if move the below if statement outside read/write
> pair.
> if (newstate == DC_DISABLE) {
>
> > > static int sfi_cpufreq_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> > > unsigned int index) {
> > > ...
> > >
> > > rdmsr_on_cpu(policy->cpu, MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL, &lo, &hi);
> > > lo = (lo & ~INTEL_PERF_CTL_MASK) |
> > > ((u32) sfi_cpufreq_array[next_perf_state].ctrl_val &
> > > INTEL_PERF_CTL_MASK);
> > > wrmsr_on_cpu(policy->cpu, MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL, lo, hi);
> >
> > Ditto.
> >
> > These two examples prove my point, actually.
>
> same here, it is just clear mask and set mask, why not?
And what's the actual saving over a simple function which does that rdmsr,
modify, wrmsr thing and call it via smp_call_function like you did for 2 of 3
places in the rapl driver?
The amount of IPIs is the same. The amount of saved code is questionable. Lets
look at your usecase:
@@ -805,30 +809,18 @@ static int rapl_write_data_raw(struct rapl_domain *rd,
enum rapl_primitives prim,
unsigned long long value)
{
- u64 msr_val;
- u32 msr;
struct rapl_primitive_info *rp = &rpi[prim];
int cpu;
+ u64 bits;
cpu = find_active_cpu_on_package(rd->package_id);
if (cpu < 0)
return cpu;
- msr = rd->msrs[rp->id];
- if (rdmsrl_safe_on_cpu(cpu, msr, &msr_val)) {
- dev_dbg(&rd->power_zone.dev,
- "failed to read msr 0x%x on cpu %d\n", msr, cpu);
- return -EIO;
- }
- value = rapl_unit_xlate(rd, rd->package_id, rp->unit, value, 1);
- msr_val &= ~rp->mask;
- msr_val |= value << rp->shift;
- if (wrmsrl_safe_on_cpu(cpu, msr, msr_val)) {
- dev_dbg(&rd->power_zone.dev,
- "failed to write msr 0x%x on cpu %d\n", msr, cpu);
- return -EIO;
- }
- return 0;
+ bits = rapl_unit_xlate(rd, rd->package_id, rp->unit, value, 1);
+ bits |= bits << rp->shift;
+
+ return rmwmsrl_safe_on_cpu(cpu, rd->msrs[rp->id], rp->mask, bits);
}
So that has: 5 insertions and 17 deletions
And the library code adds 65 lines including an export. So the text size
balance of this is:
Mainline:
text data bss dec hex filename
5021 1008 0 6029 178d ../build/arch/x86/lib/built-in.o
10870 1040 24 11934 2e9e ../build/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl.o
Your patch (Just the above part which uses the lib stuff)
5385 1008 0 6393 18f9 ../build/arch/x86/lib/built-in.o
10838 1040 24 11902 2e7e ../build/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl.o
-----
+ 332
Now you have two more possible candidates, which require another 65 lines of
different library code and lets assume another 364 bytes of library code. So
lets further assume the above examples safe us like the rapl one 32 bytes
each, then the net damage is: 632 byte extra text size.
So what exactly is the point of this exercise?
Thanks,
tglx
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-13 21:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-13 1:11 [PATCH v2 0/2] Reduce IPI calls for remote msr access Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 1:11 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/msr: add on cpu read/modify/write function Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 1:11 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] powercap/rapl: reduce ipi calls Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 9:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-13 16:21 ` Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 16:36 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-13 17:51 ` Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 18:04 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-13 18:21 ` Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 19:16 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-13 20:10 ` Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 21:26 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-13 21:54 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2016-01-13 22:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-13 22:11 ` Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 22:23 ` H. Peter Anvin
2016-01-13 22:16 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-13 22:39 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2016-01-13 22:20 ` Jacob Pan
2016-01-13 22:29 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-13 21:49 ` Thomas Gleixner [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=alpine.DEB.2.11.1601132203190.3575@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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