public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com>,
	"Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Kernel bug 60770
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 15:53:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1409234000.5212.7.camel@marge.simpson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+5PVA5XxcQe+Coy-OdMRsAxSCH=3B7QdsdXO2GqRkFDcAt0iA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 09:23 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: 
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > Hi Len,
> >
> > Kernel bug https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60770 is marked
> > as closed, but there is a patch that at least one user seems to need
> > to get things booting properly.  It was sent upstream a while ago:
> >
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=138976439211647&w=2
> >
> > but has never made it into the kernel.  Do you know why this is or
> > what happened to the patch?
> 
> Adding Peter and Ingo.  Len seems to be MIA or otherwise occupied.
> 
> Peter and Ingo, and thoughts on the bug/thread above?

That patch needs some bend adjustment, now looks like below here.

Patch also has a secondary benefit for core2 boxen, when booted
processor.max_cstate=1, box can still use mwait.

Subject: [PATCH REGRESSION FIX] x86 idle: restore mwait_idle()
From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:37:34 -0500

From: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>

In Linux-3.9 we removed the mwait_idle() loop:
'x86 idle: remove mwait_idle() and "idle=mwait" cmdline param'
(69fb3676df3329a7142803bb3502fa59dc0db2e3)

The reasoning was that modern machines should be sufficiently
happy during the boot process using the default_idle() HALT loop,
until cpuidle loads and either acpi_idle or intel_idle
invoke the newer MWAIT-with-hints idle loop.

But two machines reported problems:
1. Certain Core2-era machines support MWAIT-C1 and HALT only.
   MWAIT-C1 is preferred for optimal power and performance.
   But if they support just C1, cpuidle never loads and
   so they use the boot-time default idle loop forever.

2. Some laptops will boot-hang if HALT is used,
   but will boot successfully if MWAIT is used.
   This appears to be a hidden assumption in BIOS SMI,
   that is presumably valid on the proprietary OS
   where the BIOS was validated.

   https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60770

So here we effectively revert the patch above, restoring
the mwait_idle() loop.  However, we don't bother restoring
the idle=mwait cmdline parameter, since it appears to add
no value.

Maintainer notes:
For 3.9, simply revert 69fb3676df
for 3.10, patch -F3 applies, fuzz needed due to __cpuinit use in context
For 3.11, 3.12, 3.13, this patch applies cleanly

Mike: add clflush barriers and resched IPI avoidance.

Cc: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>
Cc: Ian Malone <ibmalone@gmail.com>
Cc: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@redhat.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.13
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/mwait.h |    8 ++++++
 arch/x86/kernel/process.c    |   50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 58 insertions(+)

--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mwait.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mwait.h
@@ -30,6 +30,14 @@ static inline void __mwait(unsigned long
 		     :: "a" (eax), "c" (ecx));
 }
 
+static inline void __sti_mwait(unsigned long eax, unsigned long ecx)
+{
+	trace_hardirqs_on();
+	/* "mwait %eax, %ecx;" */
+	asm volatile("sti; .byte 0x0f, 0x01, 0xc9;"
+		     :: "a" (eax), "c" (ecx));
+}
+
 /*
  * This uses new MONITOR/MWAIT instructions on P4 processors with PNI,
  * which can obviate IPI to trigger checking of need_resched.
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
 #include <asm/fpu-internal.h>
 #include <asm/debugreg.h>
 #include <asm/nmi.h>
+#include <asm/mwait.h>
 
 /*
  * per-CPU TSS segments. Threads are completely 'soft' on Linux,
@@ -396,6 +397,52 @@ static void amd_e400_idle(void)
 		default_idle();
 }
 
+/*
+ * Intel Core2 and older machines prefer MWAIT over HALT for C1.
+ * We can't rely on cpuidle installing MWAIT, because it will not load
+ * on systems that support only C1 -- so the boot default must be MWAIT.
+ *
+ * Some AMD machines are the opposite, they depend on using HALT.
+ *
+ * So for default C1, which is used during boot until cpuidle loads,
+ * use MWAIT-C1 on Intel HW that has it, else use HALT.
+ */
+static int prefer_mwait_c1_over_halt(const struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
+{
+	if (c->x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_INTEL)
+		return 0;
+
+	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_MWAIT))
+		return 0;
+
+	return 1;
+}
+
+/*
+ * MONITOR/MWAIT with no hints, used for default default C1 state.
+ * This invokes MWAIT with interrutps enabled and no flags,
+ * which is backwards compatible with the original MWAIT implementation.
+ */
+
+static void mwait_idle(void)
+{
+	if (!current_set_polling_and_test()) {
+		if (static_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_CLFLUSH_MONITOR)) {
+			mb();
+			clflush((void *)&current_thread_info()->flags);
+			mb();
+		}
+
+		__monitor((void *)&current_thread_info()->flags, 0, 0);
+		if (!need_resched())
+			__sti_mwait(0, 0);
+		else
+			local_irq_enable();
+	} else
+		local_irq_enable();
+	current_clr_polling();
+}
+
 void select_idle_routine(const struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 {
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
@@ -409,6 +456,9 @@ void select_idle_routine(const struct cp
 		/* E400: APIC timer interrupt does not wake up CPU from C1e */
 		pr_info("using AMD E400 aware idle routine\n");
 		x86_idle = amd_e400_idle;
+	} else if (prefer_mwait_c1_over_halt(c)) {
+		pr_info("using mwait in idle threads\n");
+		x86_idle = mwait_idle;
 	} else
 		x86_idle = default_idle;
 }



  reply	other threads:[~2014-08-28 13:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-16 14:33 Kernel bug 60770 Josh Boyer
2014-08-28 13:23 ` Josh Boyer
2014-08-28 13:53   ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2014-08-29  2:19     ` Brown, Len
2014-09-19 16:24     ` Peter Hurley
2014-09-19 18:36       ` Mike Galbraith

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=1409234000.5212.7.camel@marge.simpson.net \
    --to=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=ibmalone@gmail.com \
    --cc=jwboyer@fedoraproject.org \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@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