Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:50:41 -0500 | From | Nathan Zimmer <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] cpufreq: cpufreq_driver_lock is hot on large systems |
| |
On 03/11/2013 06:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, February 22, 2013 10:24:33 AM Nathan Zimmer wrote: >> I am noticing the cpufreq_driver_lock is quite hot. >> On an idle 512 system perf shows me most of the system time is spent on this >> lock. This is quite significant as top shows 5% of time in system time. >> My solution was to first convert the lock to a rwlock and then to the rcu. >> >> v2: Rebase >> >> v3: Read the RCU documentation instead of skimming it. Also I based on >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git pm+acpi-3.9-rc1 >> I assumed that was what you would prefer Rafael. >> >> v4: Removed an unnecessary syncronize_rcu(). >> >> >> Nathan Zimmer (2): >> cpufreq: Convert the cpufreq_driver_lock to a rwlock >> cpufreq: Convert the cpufreq_driver_lock to use the rcu >> >> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 286 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ >> 1 file changed, 211 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-) > I'm going to take patch [1/2] for v3.10, but patch [2/2] still needs some > work it seems. Is that correct? If so, are you going to send an update? > > Rafael >
Viresh pointed out that cpufreq_cpu_data still needs a lock. This means placing a vanilla spinlock back into __cpufreq_cpu_get which is what I need to avoid. I haven't had the time I should to sort that out.
Nate
| |