linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.ibm.com>
To: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpuidle-pseries: Fix CEDE latency conversion from tb to us
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 21:21:26 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200903155100.GA3831@drishya.in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1599125247-28488-1-git-send-email-ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

* Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [2020-09-03 14:57:27]:

> From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> commit d947fb4c965c ("cpuidle: pseries: Fixup exit latency for
> CEDE(0)") sets the exit latency of CEDE(0) based on the latency values
> of the Extended CEDE states advertised by the platform. The values
> advertised by the platform are in timebase ticks. However the cpuidle
> framework requires the latency values in microseconds.
> 
> If the tb-ticks value advertised by the platform correspond to a value
> smaller than 1us, during the conversion from tb-ticks to microseconds,
> in the current code, the result becomes zero. This is incorrect as it
> puts a CEDE state on par with the snooze state.
> 
> This patch fixes this by rounding up the result obtained while
> converting the latency value from tb-ticks to microseconds. It also
> prints a warning in case we discover an extended-cede state with
> wakeup latency to be 0. In such a case, ensure that CEDE(0) has a
> non-zero wakeup latency.
> 
> Fixes: commit d947fb4c965c ("cpuidle: pseries: Fixup exit latency for
> CEDE(0)")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Reviewed-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.ibm.com>

> ---
> v1-->v2: Added a warning if a CEDE state has 0 wakeup latency (Suggested by Joel Stanley)
>          Also added code to ensure that CEDE(0) has a non-zero wakeup latency.	 
>  drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-pseries.c | 15 +++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-pseries.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-pseries.c
> index ff6d99e..a2b5c6f 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-pseries.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-pseries.c
> @@ -361,7 +361,10 @@ static void __init fixup_cede0_latency(void)
>  	for (i = 0; i < nr_xcede_records; i++) {
>  		struct xcede_latency_record *record = &payload->records[i];
>  		u64 latency_tb = be64_to_cpu(record->latency_ticks);
> -		u64 latency_us = tb_to_ns(latency_tb) / NSEC_PER_USEC;
> +		u64 latency_us = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(tb_to_ns(latency_tb), NSEC_PER_USEC);

This would fix the issue of rounding down to zero.

> +
> +		if (latency_us == 0)
> +			pr_warn("cpuidle: xcede record %d has an unrealistic latency of 0us.\n", i);

+1  This should not happen.

>  		if (latency_us < min_latency_us)
>  			min_latency_us = latency_us;
> @@ -378,10 +381,14 @@ static void __init fixup_cede0_latency(void)
>  	 * Perform the fix-up.
>  	 */
>  	if (min_latency_us < dedicated_states[1].exit_latency) {
> -		u64 cede0_latency = min_latency_us - 1;
> +		/*
> +		 * We set a minimum of 1us wakeup latency for cede0 to
> +		 * distinguish it from snooze
> +		 */
> +		u64 cede0_latency = 1;
> 
> -		if (cede0_latency <= 0)
> -			cede0_latency = min_latency_us;
> +		if (min_latency_us > cede0_latency)
> +			cede0_latency = min_latency_us - 1;

Good checks to expect cede latency of 1us or more.

>  		dedicated_states[1].exit_latency = cede0_latency;
>  		dedicated_states[1].target_residency = 10 * (cede0_latency);

--Vaidy


  reply	other threads:[~2020-09-03 16:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-03  9:27 [PATCH v2] cpuidle-pseries: Fix CEDE latency conversion from tb to us Gautham R. Shenoy
2020-09-03 15:51 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan [this message]
2020-09-10 12:55 ` Michael Ellerman

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=20200903155100.GA3831@drishya.in.ibm.com \
    --to=svaidy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=joel@jms.id.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    /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).