From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
<linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] cpuidle: Handle TIF_NR_POLLING on behalf of CPUIDLE_FLAG_MWAIT states
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 23:39:28 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ca4f26e7-aa6a-4dd1-a10d-ea0d9bece6a6@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250102150201.21639-5-frederic@kernel.org>
Hello Frederic,
On 1/2/2025 8:31 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> [..snip..]
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle.c b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> index 621696269584..9eece3df1080 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> @@ -114,12 +114,13 @@ void __cpuidle default_idle_call(void)
> stop_critical_timings();
>
> ct_cpuidle_enter();
> - arch_cpu_idle();
> + arch_cpu_idle(); // XXX assumes !polling
> ct_cpuidle_exit();
>
> start_critical_timings();
> trace_cpu_idle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, smp_processor_id());
> cond_tick_broadcast_exit();
> + __current_set_polling();
> }
> local_irq_enable();
> instrumentation_end();
> @@ -128,31 +129,14 @@ void __cpuidle default_idle_call(void)
> static int call_cpuidle_s2idle(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> struct cpuidle_device *dev)
> {
> + int ret;
> +
> if (current_clr_polling_and_test())
> return -EBUSY;
>
> - return cpuidle_enter_s2idle(drv, dev);
> -}
> -
> -static int call_cpuidle(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev,
> - int next_state)
> -{
> - /*
> - * The idle task must be scheduled, it is pointless to go to idle, just
> - * update no idle residency and return.
> - */
> - if (current_clr_polling_and_test()) {
nit.
Previously, if TIF_NEED_RESCHED was set by this point, the CPU would
bail out early before entering the idle state but with this change, I
believe only at need_resched() in mwait_idle_with_hints() do we realize
we have a pending IPI / task wakeup. Is this a concern?
In my testing with ipistorm I could not see any difference in IPI
throughput to polling idle CPUs but a bailout before the entry method
for need_resched() can save a few cycles.
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek
> - dev->last_residency_ns = 0;
> - local_irq_enable();
> - return -EBUSY;
> - }
> -
> - /*
> - * Enter the idle state previously returned by the governor decision.
> - * This function will block until an interrupt occurs and will take
> - * care of re-enabling the local interrupts
> - */
> - return cpuidle_enter(drv, dev, next_state);
> + ret = cpuidle_enter_s2idle(drv, dev);
> + __current_set_polling();
> + return ret;
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -213,7 +197,7 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
> tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick();
>
> next_state = cpuidle_find_deepest_state(drv, dev, max_latency_ns);
> - call_cpuidle(drv, dev, next_state);
> + cpuidle_enter(drv, dev, next_state);
> } else {
> bool stop_tick = true;
>
> @@ -227,7 +211,12 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call (void)
> else
> tick_nohz_idle_retain_tick();
>
> - entered_state = call_cpuidle(drv, dev, next_state);
> + /*
> + * Enter the idle state previously returned by the governor decision.
> + * This function will block until an interrupt occurs and will take
> + * care of re-enabling the local interrupts.
> + */
> + entered_state = cpuidle_enter(drv, dev, next_state);
> /*
> * Give the governor an opportunity to reflect on the outcome
> */
> @@ -235,7 +224,6 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
> }
>
> exit_idle:
> - __current_set_polling();
>
> /*
> * It is up to the idle functions to re-enable local interrupts
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-17 18:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-02 15:01 [PATCH 0/6 v3] cpuidle: Handle TIF_NR_POLLING on behalf of polling idle states Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-02 15:01 ` [PATCH 1/6] cpuidle: Remove unnecessary current_clr_polling_and_test() from haltpoll Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-02 15:01 ` [PATCH 2/6] cpuidle: Introduce CPUIDLE_FLAG_MWAIT Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-14 14:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-01-14 14:34 ` Sudeep Holla
2025-01-14 14:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-01-02 15:01 ` [PATCH 3/6] x86/cpuidle: Move buggy mwait implementations away from CPUIDLE_FLAG_MWAIT Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-14 14:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-01-02 15:01 ` [PATCH 4/6] cpuidle: Handle TIF_NR_POLLING on behalf of CPUIDLE_FLAG_MWAIT states Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-14 14:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-01-17 18:09 ` K Prateek Nayak [this message]
2025-01-02 15:01 ` [PATCH 5/6] cpuidle: Remove call_cpuidle_s2idle() Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-14 14:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-01-02 15:02 ` [PATCH 6/6] cpuidle: Handle TIF_NR_POLLING on behalf of software polling idle states Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-14 14:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-01-17 17:51 ` [PATCH 0/6 v3] cpuidle: Handle TIF_NR_POLLING on behalf of " K Prateek Nayak
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=ca4f26e7-aa6a-4dd1-a10d-ea0d9bece6a6@amd.com \
--to=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--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@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).