linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: "Shreyas B. Prabhu" <shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, rjw@rjwysocki.net
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	anton@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, bsingharora@gmail.com,
	David.Laight@ACULAB.COM, arnd@arndb.de, nicolas.pitre@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] cpuidle: Fix last_residency division
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:57:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5775335E.2040003@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1467297253-2171-1-git-send-email-shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On 06/30/2016 04:34 PM, Shreyas B. Prabhu wrote:
> Snooze is a poll idle state in powernv and pseries platforms. Snooze
> has a timeout so that if a cpu stays in snooze for more than target
> residency of the next available idle state, then it would exit thereby
> giving chance to the cpuidle governor to re-evaluate and
> promote the cpu to a deeper idle state. Therefore whenever snooze exits
> due to this timeout, its last_residency will be target_residency of next
> deeper state.
>
> commit e93e59ce5b85 ("cpuidle: Replace ktime_get() with local_clock()")
> changed the math around last_residency calculation. Specifically, while
> converting last_residency value from nanoseconds to microseconds it does
> right shift by 10. Due to this, in snooze timeout exit scenarios
> last_residency calculated is roughly 2.3% less than target_residency of
> next available state. This pattern is picked up get_typical_interval()
> in the menu governor and therefore expected_interval in menu_select() is
> frequently less than the target_residency of any state but snooze.
>
> Due to this we are entering snooze at a higher rate, thereby affecting
> the single thread performance.
>
> Fix this by using a better approximation for division by 1000.
>
> Reported-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
> Bisected-by: Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Suggested-by David Laight <david.laight@aculab.com>
> Signed-off-by: Shreyas B. Prabhu <shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> Changes in v4
> =============
>   - Increasing the threshold upto which approximation can be used.
>   - Removed explicit cast. Instead added a comment saying why cast
>     is safe.
>
> Changes in v3
> =============
>   - Using approximation suggested by David
>
> Changes in v2
> =============
>   - Fixing it in the cpuidle core code instead of driver code.
>
>   drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c | 11 +++--------
>   drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.h | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> index a4d0059..f55ad01 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> @@ -174,7 +174,6 @@ int cpuidle_enter_state(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
>   	struct cpuidle_state *target_state = &drv->states[index];
>   	bool broadcast = !!(target_state->flags & CPUIDLE_FLAG_TIMER_STOP);
>   	u64 time_start, time_end;
> -	s64 diff;
>
>   	/*
>   	 * Tell the time framework to switch to a broadcast timer because our
> @@ -218,14 +217,10 @@ int cpuidle_enter_state(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
>   		local_irq_enable();
>
>   	/*
> -	 * local_clock() returns the time in nanosecond, let's shift
> -	 * by 10 (divide by 1024) to have microsecond based time.
> +	 * local_clock() returns the time in nanoseconds, convert it to
> +	 * microsecond based time.
>   	 */
> -	diff = (time_end - time_start) >> 10;
> -	if (diff > INT_MAX)
> -		diff = INT_MAX;
> -
> -	dev->last_residency = (int) diff;
> +	dev->last_residency = convert_nsec_to_usec(time_end - time_start);
>
>   	if (entered_state >= 0) {
>   		/* Update cpuidle counters */
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.h b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.h
> index f87f399..a027b35 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.h
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.h
> @@ -68,4 +68,42 @@ static inline void cpuidle_coupled_unregister_device(struct cpuidle_device *dev)
>   }
>   #endif
>
> +/*
> + * To ensure that there is no overflow while approximation
> + * for dividing val by 1000, we must respect -
> + * val + (val >> 5) <= 0xFFFFFFFF
> + * val + val/32 <= 0xFFFFFFFF
> + * val <= (0xFFFFFFFF * 32) / 33
> + * val <= 0xF83E0F82
> + * Hence the threshold for val below which we can use the
> + * approximation is 0xF83E0F82
> + */
> +#define DIV_APPROXIMATION_THRESHOLD 0xF83E0F82UL
> +
> +/*
> + * Used for calculating last_residency in usec. Optimized for case
> + * where last_residency in nsecs is < DIV_APPROXIMATION_THRESHOLD
> + * Approximated value has less than 1% error.
> + */
> +static inline int convert_nsec_to_usec(u64 nsec)
> +{
> +	if (likely(nsec < DIV_APPROXIMATION_THRESHOLD)) {
> +		u32 usec = nsec;
> +
> +		usec += usec >> 5;
> +		usec = usec >> 10;
> +
> +		/* Can safely cast to int since usec is < INT_MAX */
> +		return usec;
> +	} else {
> +		u64 usec = div_u64(nsec, 1000);
> +
> +		if (usec > INT_MAX)
> +			usec = INT_MAX;
> +
> +		/* Can safely cast to int since usec is < INT_MAX */
> +		return usec;
> +	}
> +}


What bothers me with this division is the benefit of adding an extra 
ultra optimized division by 1000 in cpuidle.h while we have already 
ktime_divns which is optimized in ktime.h.

Why not:

ts = ns_to_ktime(local_clock());

...

te = ns_to_ktime(local_clock());


diff = ktime_us_delta(te, ts);





-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-30 14:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-30 14:34 [PATCH v4] cpuidle: Fix last_residency division Shreyas B. Prabhu
2016-06-30 14:57 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2016-06-30 15:37   ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-07-01  8:06     ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-07-01 12:41       ` Balbir Singh
2016-07-01 13:02         ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-07-01 13:00       ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-07-01 14:16       ` Shreyas B Prabhu

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=5775335E.2040003@linaro.org \
    --to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /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).