* Why is the e500v2 core not using cpuidle?
@ 2013-02-01 12:06 Thomas Waldecker
2013-02-01 18:15 ` Scott Wood
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Waldecker @ 2013-02-01 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux PPC dev mailing list (linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org)
Hi,
As part of my masterthesis I was just looking around the kernel=20
sources for cpuidle and figured out that the only CPU in the PowerPC=20
architecture using the cpuidle framework is the pseries.
I assume the e500v2 core is using the idle modes=20
in arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_e500.S
Why is there no support for the cpuidle framework?
How can I debug the e500 idle modes?=20
Are there any statistics?
I already ran PowerTOP on a QorIQ P2020 but it's almost useless=20
because the information is missing.
Kind regards,
Thomas Waldecker
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Why is the e500v2 core not using cpuidle?
2013-02-01 12:06 Why is the e500v2 core not using cpuidle? Thomas Waldecker
@ 2013-02-01 18:15 ` Scott Wood
2013-02-02 9:41 ` AW: " Thomas Waldecker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Scott Wood @ 2013-02-01 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Waldecker
Cc: Linux PPC dev mailing list (linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org)
On 02/01/2013 06:06:05 AM, Thomas Waldecker wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> As part of my masterthesis I was just looking around the kernel
> sources for cpuidle and figured out that the only CPU in the PowerPC
> architecture using the cpuidle framework is the pseries.
>=20
> I assume the e500v2 core is using the idle modes
> in arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_e500.S
>=20
> Why is there no support for the cpuidle framework?
Because nobody implemented it. :-)
The only reason I can think of to implement it on this chip would be to =20
dynamically choose when to enter nap versus doze, rather than always =20
just using doze. It's not clear whether the difference in power =20
savings is worth it -- do you have any way of measuring?
> How can I debug the e500 idle modes?
> Are there any statistics?
Top reports idle percentage...
> I already ran PowerTOP on a QorIQ P2020 but it's almost useless
> because the information is missing.
What information are you looking for?
-Scott=
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* AW: Why is the e500v2 core not using cpuidle?
2013-02-01 18:15 ` Scott Wood
@ 2013-02-02 9:41 ` Thomas Waldecker
2013-02-04 20:02 ` Scott Wood
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Waldecker @ 2013-02-02 9:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Wood; +Cc: Linux PPC dev mailing list (linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org)
Hi Scott,=0A=
=0A=
>> Why is there no support for the cpuidle framework?=0A=
> Because nobody implemented it. :-)=0A=
That's the reason I thought before :-)=0A=
=0A=
> The only reason I can think of to implement it on this chip would be to=
=0A=
> dynamically choose when to enter nap versus doze, rather than always=0A=
> just using doze. It's not clear whether the difference in power=0A=
> savings is worth it -- do you have any way of measuring?=0A=
=0A=
Is the e500 only using doze? There are comments in the file =0A=
arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_e500.S=0A=
which are stating:=0A=
/* Go to NAP or DOZE now */=0A=
or=0A=
/* Return from NAP/DOZE ...*/=0A=
=0A=
and because of this comments I thought that both modes are in use.=0A=
=0A=
I have a way of measuring the power and it is also a small part of my maste=
rthesis,=0A=
but it is not very meaningful because at the measuring point there are othe=
r peripheral=0A=
components too.=0A=
=0A=
According to the comments can I activate the nap mode somehow?=0A=
=0A=
>> How can I debug the e500 idle modes?=0A=
>> Are there any statistics?=0A=
> Top reports idle percentage...=0A=
If the e500 and e500v2 are indeed using only the doze mode it =0A=
would be enough statistics.=0A=
=0A=
>> I already ran PowerTOP on a QorIQ P2020 but it's almost useless=0A=
>> because the information is missing.=0A=
> What information are you looking for?=0A=
=0A=
On my laptop I get detailled idle stats in PowerTOP 2.2=0A=
=0A=
Package | CPU 0=0A=
POLL 0.0% | POLL 0.0% 0.0 ms=0A=
C1 0.7% | C1 0.4% 0.2 ms=0A=
C2 86.0% | C2 86.8% 1.4 ms=0A=
=0A=
| CPU 1=0A=
| POLL 0.0% 0.4 ms=0A=
| C1 0.9% 0.6 ms=0A=
| C2 85.2% 1.5 ms=0A=
=0A=
It is using the sysfs interface=0A=
=0A=
thomas@localhost /s/d/s/c/c/cpuidle> pwd=0A=
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpuidle=0A=
thomas@localhost /s/d/s/c/c/cpuidle> tree=0A=
.=0A=
=86=80=80 state0=0A=
=81=9A=9A =86=80=80 desc=0A=
=81=9A=9A =86=80=80 disable=0A=
=81=9A=9A =86=80=80 latency=0A=
=81=9A=9A =86=80=80 name=0A=
=81=9A=9A =86=80=80 power=0A=
=81=9A=9A =86=80=80 time=0A=
=81=9A=9A =84=80=80 usage=0A=
=86=80=80 state1=0A=
(same as state0)=0A=
=84=80=80 state2=0A=
(also same as state 0)=0A=
thomas@localhost /s/d/s/c/c/cpuidle> cat */name=0A=
POLL=0A=
C1=0A=
C2=0A=
=0A=
Such statistics would be great for the doze, nap (and sleep for the whole p=
ackage).=0A=
=0A=
Kind regards,=0A=
Thomas=
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: Why is the e500v2 core not using cpuidle?
2013-02-02 9:41 ` AW: " Thomas Waldecker
@ 2013-02-04 20:02 ` Scott Wood
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Scott Wood @ 2013-02-04 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Waldecker
Cc: Linux PPC dev mailing list (linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org)
On 02/02/2013 03:41:27 AM, Thomas Waldecker wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>=20
> >> Why is there no support for the cpuidle framework?
> > Because nobody implemented it. :-)
> That's the reason I thought before :-)
>=20
> > The only reason I can think of to implement it on this chip would =20
> be to
> > dynamically choose when to enter nap versus doze, rather than always
> > just using doze. It's not clear whether the difference in power
> > savings is worth it -- do you have any way of measuring?
>=20
> Is the e500 only using doze? There are comments in the file
> arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_e500.S
> which are stating:
> /* Go to NAP or DOZE now */
> or
> /* Return from NAP/DOZE ...*/
>=20
> and because of this comments I thought that both modes are in use.
e500 can use nap instead, but it's statically chosen via sysctl. The =20
default is doze. Entering nap requires flushing the cache, so you'd =20
only use nap if you care more about lowering idle power consumption =20
than performance, and you wake infrequently enough that you're not =20
burning more power on the cache flushes than you save with the deeper =20
idle state.
> I have a way of measuring the power and it is also a small part of my =20
> masterthesis,
> but it is not very meaningful because at the measuring point there =20
> are other peripheral
> components too.
>=20
> According to the comments can I activate the nap mode somehow?
echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/powersave-nap
If you're able to measure a meaningful difference between the two, I'd =20
be interested in hearing your results.
> >> How can I debug the e500 idle modes?
> >> Are there any statistics?
> > Top reports idle percentage...
> If the e500 and e500v2 are indeed using only the doze mode it
> would be enough statistics.
Whichever mode you have selected, that will be used for all idling. =20
Statistics would only be useful if the idle mode were dynamically =20
chosen.
> Such statistics would be great for the doze, nap (and sleep for the =20
> whole package).
The only way you'll get into sleep mode is through /sys/power/state.
-Scott=
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Why is the e500v2 core not using cpuidle?
@ 2013-02-07 12:19 Thomas Waldecker
2013-02-07 18:01 ` Scott Wood
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Waldecker @ 2013-02-07 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Wood; +Cc: Linux PPC dev mailing list (linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org)
Hi Scott,
I measured the power consumption of the whole system on the tqmp2020 ( http=
://tq-group.com/tqmp2020 )
with a QorIQ P2020.
Kernel:
root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# uname -a
Linux generic-powerpc-e500v2 3.7.0-rc8-00004-g6e93414 #4 SMP Tue Dec 11 08:=
53:23 CET 2012 ppc GNU/Linux
root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# cat /etc/issue
ELDK 5.2.1 \n \l
In idle using doze I got:
545mA, 18V =3D> 9.81W
In idle using nap I got:
500mA, 18V =3D> 9W
That's a difference of 0.81W,
0.81W/9.81W =3D 0.083 (8.3 %)
> The only way you'll get into sleep mode is through /sys/power/state.
How can I use this interface?
root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# ls -la
total 0
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Feb 1 15:39 .
dr-xr-xr-x 12 root root 0 Feb 1 15:19 ..
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4096 Feb 1 15:39 state
root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# cat state
root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# echo "sleep" > state
-sh: echo: write error: Function not implemented
root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# echo 0 > state
-sh: echo: write error: Function not implemented
root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power#
Kind regards
Thomas Waldecker
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Why is the e500v2 core not using cpuidle?
2013-02-07 12:19 Thomas Waldecker
@ 2013-02-07 18:01 ` Scott Wood
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Scott Wood @ 2013-02-07 18:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Waldecker
Cc: Linux PPC dev mailing list (linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org)
On 02/07/2013 06:19:25 AM, Thomas Waldecker wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>=20
> I measured the power consumption of the whole system on the tqmp2020 =20
> ( http://tq-group.com/tqmp2020 )
> with a QorIQ P2020.
>=20
> Kernel:
> root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# uname -a
> Linux generic-powerpc-e500v2 3.7.0-rc8-00004-g6e93414 #4 SMP Tue Dec =20
> 11 08:53:23 CET 2012 ppc GNU/Linux
> root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# cat /etc/issue
> ELDK 5.2.1 \n \l
>=20
> In idle using doze I got:
> 545mA, 18V =3D> 9.81W
>=20
> In idle using nap I got:
> 500mA, 18V =3D> 9W
>=20
> That's a difference of 0.81W,
> 0.81W/9.81W =3D 0.083 (8.3 %)
Thanks.
> > The only way you'll get into sleep mode is through /sys/power/state.
>=20
> How can I use this interface?
>=20
> root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# ls -la
> total 0
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Feb 1 15:39 .
> dr-xr-xr-x 12 root root 0 Feb 1 15:19 ..
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4096 Feb 1 15:39 state
> root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# cat state
> root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# echo "sleep" > state
> -sh: echo: write error: Function not implemented
> root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power# echo 0 > state
> -sh: echo: write error: Function not implemented
> root@generic-powerpc-e500v2:/sys/power#
Make sure that CONFIG_FSL_PMC is enabled, and that you have a pmc node =20
in the device tree. You'll only have standby, not sleep. mpc8536 and =20
p1022 can support what the chip calls "deep sleep" and is exposed as =20
"sleep" rather than "standby", but it doesn't look like the code for =20
that has made it into mainline Linux yet.
-Scott=
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-07 18:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-02-01 12:06 Why is the e500v2 core not using cpuidle? Thomas Waldecker
2013-02-01 18:15 ` Scott Wood
2013-02-02 9:41 ` AW: " Thomas Waldecker
2013-02-04 20:02 ` Scott Wood
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-02-07 12:19 Thomas Waldecker
2013-02-07 18:01 ` Scott Wood
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).