On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 09:13:40AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 05:50:14PM +0200, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 09:44:17AM -0600, Lina Iyer wrote: > > > > > > > > I could add RCU_NONIDLE for the calls to pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend() > > > > > > > > and pm_runtime_get_sync() in psci_enter_domain_idle_state(). Perhaps > > > > > > > > that's the easiest approach, at least to start with. > > > > > I think this would be nice. This should also cover the case, where PM domain > > > power off notification callbacks call trace function internally. Right? > > > > That's just more crap for me to clean up later :-( > > > > trace_*_rcuidle() and RCU_NONIDLE() need to die, not proliferate. > > Moving the idle-entry boundary further in is good in any number of ways. > But experience indicates that no matter how far you move it, there will > be something complex further in. Unless you are pushing it all the way > into all the arch-specific code down as far as it can possibly go? Not all; the simple cpuidle drivers should be good already. The more complicated ones need some help. The patch provided earlier: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200901104206.GU1362448@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx should allow the complicated drivers to take over and DTRT.
