On Thu, Nov 19 2015 at 01:50 -0700, Marc Titinger wrote:
On 18/11/2015 19:42, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 03:37:42PM -0700, Lina Iyer wrote:
A PM domain comprising of CPUs may be powered off when all the CPUs in
the domain are powered down. Powering down a CPU domain is generally a
expensive operation and therefore the power performance trade offs
should be considered. The time between the last CPU powering down and
the first CPU powering up in a domain, is the time available for the
domain to sleep. Ideally, the sleep time of the domain should fulfill
the residency requirement of the domains' idle state.
To do this effectively, read the time before the wakeup of the cluster's
CPUs and ensure that the domain's idle state sleep time guarantees the
QoS requirements of each of the CPU, the PM QoS CPU_DMA_LATENCY and the
state's residency.
To me this information should be part of the CPUidle governor (it is
already there), we should not split the decision into multiple layers.
The problem you are facing is that the CPUidle governor(s) do not take
cross cpus relationship into account, I do not think that adding another
decision layer in the power domain subsystem helps, you are doing that
just because adding it to the existing CPUidle governor(s) is invasive.
Why can't we use the power domain work you put together to eg disable
idle states that share multiple cpus and make them "visible" only
when the power domain that encompass them is actually going down ?
You could use the power domains information to detect states that
are shared between cpus.
It is just an idea, what I am saying is that having another governor in
the power domain subsytem does not make much sense, you split the
decision in two layers while there is actually one, the existing
CPUidle governor and that's where the decision should be taken.
Thoughts appreciated.
Maybe this is silly and not thought-through, but I wonder if the
responsibilities could be split or instance with an outer control loop
that has the heuristic to compute the next tick time, and the required
cpu-power needed during that time slot, and an inner control loop
(genpd) that has a per-domain QoS and can optimize power consumption.
Not sure I understand everything you said, but the heuristics across a
bunch of CPUs can be very erratic. Its hard enough for menu governor to
determine heuristics on a per-cpu basis.
I governor in this patch already takes care of PM QoS, but does not do a
per-cpu QoS.
We should discuss this more.
-- Lina
Marc.
Lorenzo
Signed-off-by: Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/base/power/cpu-pd.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 82 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/power/cpu-pd.c b/drivers/base/power/cpu-pd.c
index 617ce54..a00abc1 100644
--- a/drivers/base/power/cpu-pd.c
+++ b/drivers/base/power/cpu-pd.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include <linux/pm_qos.h>
#include <linux/rculist.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/tick.h>
#define CPU_PD_NAME_MAX 36
@@ -66,6 +67,86 @@ static void get_cpus_in_domain(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd,
}
}
+static bool cpu_pd_down_ok(struct dev_pm_domain *pd)
+{
+ struct generic_pm_domain *genpd = pd_to_genpd(pd);
+ struct cpu_pm_domain *cpu_pd = to_cpu_pd(genpd);
+ int qos = pm_qos_request(PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY);
+ u64 sleep_ns = ~0;
+ ktime_t earliest;
+ int cpu;
+ int i;
+
+ /* Reset the last set genpd state, default to index 0 */
+ genpd->state_idx = 0;
+
+ /* We dont want to power down, if QoS is 0 */
+ if (!qos)
+ return false;
+
+ /*
+ * Find the sleep time for the cluster.
+ * The time between now and the first wake up of any CPU that
+ * are in this domain hierarchy is the time available for the
+ * domain to be idle.
+ */
+ earliest.tv64 = KTIME_MAX;
+ for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpu_pd->cpus, cpu_online_mask) {
+ struct device *cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
+ struct gpd_timing_data *td;
+
+ td = &dev_gpd_data(cpu_dev)->td;
+
+ if (earliest.tv64 < td->next_wakeup.tv64)
+ earliest = td->next_wakeup;
+ }
+
+ sleep_ns = ktime_to_ns(ktime_sub(earliest, ktime_get()));
+ if (sleep_ns <= 0)
+ return false;
+
+ /*
+ * Find the deepest sleep state that satisfies the residency
+ * requirement and the QoS constraint
+ */
+ for (i = genpd->state_count - 1; i > 0; i--) {
+ u64 state_sleep_ns;
+
+ state_sleep_ns = genpd->states[i].power_off_latency_ns +
+ genpd->states[i].power_on_latency_ns +
+ genpd->states[i].residency_ns;
+
+ /*
+ * If we cant sleep to save power in the state, move on
+ * to the next lower idle state.
+ */
+ if (state_sleep_ns > sleep_ns)
+ continue;
+
+ /*
+ * We also dont want to sleep more than we should to
+ * gaurantee QoS.
+ */
+ if (state_sleep_ns < (qos * NSEC_PER_USEC))
+ break;
+ }
+
+ if (i >= 0)
+ genpd->state_idx = i;
+
+ return (i >= 0) ? true : false;
+}
+
+static bool cpu_stop_ok(struct device *dev)
+{
+ return true;
+}
+
+struct dev_power_governor cpu_pd_gov = {
+ .power_down_ok = cpu_pd_down_ok,
+ .stop_ok = cpu_stop_ok,
+};
+
static int cpu_pd_power_off(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd)
{
struct cpu_pm_domain *pd = to_cpu_pd(genpd);
@@ -183,7 +264,7 @@ int of_register_cpu_pm_domain(struct device_node *dn,
/* Register the CPU genpd */
pr_debug("adding %s as CPU PM domain.\n", pd->genpd->name);
- ret = of_pm_genpd_init(dn, pd->genpd, &simple_qos_governor, false);
+ ret = of_pm_genpd_init(dn, pd->genpd, &cpu_pd_gov, false);
if (ret) {
pr_err("Unable to initialize domain %s\n", dn->full_name);
return ret;
--
2.1.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
