Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] cpupower : Fix cpupower working when cpu0 is offline | From | Shuah Khan <> | Date | Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:20:33 -0700 |
| |
On 11/07/2017 01:58 AM, Abhishek wrote: > Hi, > > Can you have a look at it? > > Thanks and Regards, > > Abhishek Goel > > System Engineer > > IBM India Pvt. Ltd. >
Please refrain from top posting on kernel email thread. In-lining comments and bottom posting is the norm.
> > On 11/07/2017 12:50 PM, Abhishek Goel wrote: >> cpuidle_monitor used to assume that cpu0 is always online which is not >> a valid assumption on POWER machines. This patch fixes this by searching >> for the first online cpu and uses it, instead of always using cpu0 for >> monitoring which may not be online. >> >> Signed-off-by: Abhishek Goel <huntbag@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> --- >> v2: Commit message updated. >> --- >> tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c | 14 +++++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c b/tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c >> index 1b5da00..adacf99 100644 >> --- a/tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c >> +++ b/tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c >> @@ -130,15 +130,23 @@ static struct cpuidle_monitor *cpuidle_register(void) >> { >> int num; >> char *tmp; >> + int first_online_cpu; >> + >> + for (num = 0; num < cpu_count; num++) { >> + if (cpupower_is_cpu_online(num)) >> + break; >> + }; >> + first_online_cpu = num;
Isn't it simpler to use sched_getcpu()n instead and use that instead of walking the sysfs nodes since assumption is made that the idle state count is the same for all CPUs
>> >> /* Assume idle state count is the same for all CPUs */ >> - cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num = cpuidle_state_count(0);
This simply be:
cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num = cpuidle_state_count(sched_getcpu);
>> + cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num = >> + cpuidle_state_count(first_online_cpu); >> >> if (cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num <= 0) >> return NULL; >> >> for (num = 0; num < cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num; num++) { >> - tmp = cpuidle_state_name(0, num); >> + tmp = cpuidle_state_name(first_online_cpu, num); >> if (tmp == NULL) >> continue; >> >> @@ -146,7 +154,7 @@ static struct cpuidle_monitor *cpuidle_register(void) >> strncpy(cpuidle_cstates[num].name, tmp, CSTATE_NAME_LEN - 1); >> free(tmp); >> >> - tmp = cpuidle_state_desc(0, num); >> + tmp = cpuidle_state_desc(first_online_cpu, num); >> if (tmp == NULL) >> continue; >> strncpy(cpuidle_cstates[num].desc, tmp, CSTATE_DESC_LEN - 1); >
thanks, -- Shuah
| |