public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Lianwei Wang <lianwei.wang@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] cpuidle: don't wakeup processor when set a longer latency
Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 13:08:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <518A324A.8000000@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJFUiJiMMAgLGF3tiG1V59dx+KOpTBCEL3ctHUosjMDkBagbJg@mail.gmail.com>

On 05/08/2013 04:44 AM, Lianwei Wang wrote:
> When a PM-Qos is updated, the cpuidle driver will wakeup all the CPUs
> no matter what a latency is set. But actually it only need to wakeup
> the CPUs when a shorter latency is set. In this way we can reduce the
> cpu wakeup count and save battery.

I am curious, how many times could the pm_qos be changed in a system
live cycle to measure an improvement with this patch ?

Do you have a scenario where you measured a noticeable power saving ?

> So we can pass the prev_value to the notifier callback and check the
> latency curr_value and prev_value in the cpuidle latency notifier
> callback. It modify a common interface(dummy --> prev_value) but shall
> be safe since no one use the dummy parameter currently.
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> index e1f6860..1e1758c 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> @@ -498,7 +498,11 @@ static void smp_callback(void *v)
>  static int cpuidle_latency_notify(struct notifier_block *b,
>                 unsigned long l, void *v)
>  {
> -       smp_call_function(smp_callback, NULL, 1);
> +       unsigned long prev_value = (unsigned long) v;
> +
> +       /* Dont't waktup processor when set a longer latency */

                    ^^^^^^
                    wakeup

Instead of passing prev and curr, using the dummy variable, why don't
you pass the result of (curr - prev) ?

A negative value means, the latency is smaller and positive is bigger.

Also, may be the optimization could be more improved: if the latency is
bigger than the next wakeup event, it is not necessary to wakeup the cpus.

> +       if (l < prev_value)
> +               smp_call_function(smp_callback, NULL, 1);
>         return NOTIFY_OK;
>  }
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/power/qos.c b/kernel/power/qos.c
> index 9322ff7..533b8bc 100644
> --- a/kernel/power/qos.c
> +++ b/kernel/power/qos.c
> @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ int pm_qos_update_target(struct pm_qos_constraints
> *c, struct plist_node *node,
>         if (prev_value != curr_value) {
>                 blocking_notifier_call_chain(c->notifiers,
>                                              (unsigned long)curr_value,
> -                                            NULL);
> +                                            (void *)prev_value);
>                 return 1;
>         } else {
>                 return 0;
> 


-- 
 <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:[~2013-05-08 11:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-05-08  2:44 [PATCH] cpuidle: don't wakeup processor when set a longer latency Lianwei Wang
2013-05-08 11:08 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2013-05-09  7:14   ` [linux-pm] " Lianwei Wang
2013-05-09 23:45     ` Daniel Lezcano
2013-05-13  6:52       ` Lianwei Wang
2013-05-13  7:46         ` Lianwei Wang
2013-05-13  9:04         ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-05-13 15:25           ` Daniel Lezcano
2013-05-13 20:27             ` Srivatsa S. Bhat

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=518A324A.8000000@linaro.org \
    --to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=lianwei.wang@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.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