LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Ilsche <thomas.ilsche@tu-dresden.de>,
Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpuidle: poll_state: Add time limit to poll_idle()
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 13:04:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180314120450.GT4043@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4137867.C4jYrWdt8n@aspire.rjw.lan>
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:36:27AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>
> If poll_idle() is allowed to spin until need_resched() returns 'true',
> it may actually spin for a much longer time than expected by the idle
> governor, since set_tsk_need_resched() is not always called by the
> timer interrupt handler. If that happens, the CPU may spend much
> more time than anticipated in the "polling" state.
>
> To prevent that from happening, limit the time of the spinning loop
> in poll_idle().
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> ---
>
> -> v2: After additional testing reduce POLL_IDLE_TIME_CHECK_COUNT to 1000.
>
> ---
> drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpuidle/poll_state.c
> @@ -5,16 +5,31 @@
> */
>
> #include <linux/cpuidle.h>
> +#include <linux/ktime.h>
> #include <linux/sched.h>
> #include <linux/sched/idle.h>
>
> +#define POLL_IDLE_TIME_CHECK_COUNT 1000
> +#define POLL_IDLE_TIME_LIMIT (TICK_NSEC / 16)
> +
> static int __cpuidle poll_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
> struct cpuidle_driver *drv, int index)
> {
> + ktime_t start = ktime_get();
I would recoomend not using ktime_get(), imagine the 'joy' if that
happens to be the HPET.
> local_irq_enable();
> if (!current_set_polling_and_test()) {
> + unsigned int time_check_counter = 0;
> +
> + while (!need_resched()) {
> cpu_relax();
> + if (time_check_counter++ < POLL_IDLE_TIME_CHECK_COUNT)
> + continue;
> +
> + time_check_counter = 0;
> + if (ktime_sub(ktime_get(), start) > POLL_IDLE_TIME_LIMIT)
> + break;
> + }
> }
> current_clr_polling();
Since the idle loop is strictly per-cpu, you can use regular
sched_clock() here. Something like:
u64 start = sched_clock();
local_irq_enable();
if (!current_set_polling_and_test()) {
while (!need_resched()) {
cpu_relax();
if (sched_clock() - start > POLL_IDLE_TIME_LIMIT)
break;
}
}
current_clr_polling();
On x86 we don't have to use that time_check_counter thing, sched_clock()
is really cheap, not sure if it makes sense on other platforms.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-14 12:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-12 9:36 Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-14 11:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-14 12:04 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2018-03-14 12:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-22 16:32 ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-22 19:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-27 16:42 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-27 18:02 ` Rik van Riel
2018-03-27 21:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-22 19:11 ` Doug Smythies
2018-03-23 3:19 ` Doug Smythies
2018-03-23 8:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-23 9:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-03-23 21:30 ` Doug Smythies
2018-03-24 11:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20180314120450.GT4043@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dsmythies@telus.net \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgalbraith@suse.de \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thomas.ilsche@tu-dresden.de \
--subject='Re: [PATCH v2] cpuidle: poll_state: Add time limit to poll_idle()' \
/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
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).