Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH V7] powercap/drivers/idle_injection: Add an idle injection framework | From | Daniel Lezcano <> | Date | Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:28:22 +0200 |
| |
On 18/06/2018 12:38, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 18-06-18, 12:35, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> On 18/06/2018 12:22, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>> On 15-06-18, 11:19, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>>> +/** >>>> + * idle_injection_stop - stops the idle injections >>>> + * @ii_dev: a pointer to an idle injection_device structure >>>> + * >>>> + * The function stops the idle injection and waits for the threads to >>>> + * complete. If we are in the process of injecting an idle cycle, then >>>> + * this will wait the end of the cycle. >>>> + * >>>> + * When the function returns there is no more idle injection >>>> + * activity. The kthreads are scheduled out and the periodic timer is >>>> + * off. >>>> + */ >>>> +void idle_injection_stop(struct idle_injection_device *ii_dev) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct idle_injection_thread *iit; >>>> + unsigned int cpu; >>>> + >>>> + pr_debug("Stopping injecting idle cycles on CPUs '%*pbl'\n", >>>> + cpumask_pr_args(to_cpumask(ii_dev->cpumask))); >>>> + >>>> + hrtimer_cancel(&ii_dev->timer); >>>> + >>>> + /* >>>> + * We want the guarantee we have a quescient point where >>>> + * parked threads stay in there state while we are stopping >>>> + * the idle injection. After exiting the loop, if any CPU is >>>> + * plugged in, the 'should_run' boolean being false, the >>>> + * smpboot main loop schedules the task out. >>>> + */ >>>> + cpu_hotplug_disable(); >>>> + >>>> + for_each_cpu_and(cpu, to_cpumask(ii_dev->cpumask), cpu_online_mask) { >>> >>> Maybe you should do below for all CPUs in the mask. Is the below usecase >>> possible ? >>> >>> - CPU0-4 are part of the mask and are all online. >>> - hrtimer fires and sets should_run for all of them to 1. >> >> ^^ >> hrtimer_cancel gives you the guarantee, the timer is no longer active >> and there is no execution in the timer handler. So the timer can no >> longer fire after hrtimer_cancel() is called (which is a blocking call). > > Right but that isn't called yet in my sequence. > >>> - Right at this time CPU3 goes offline, so the thread gets parked with >>> should_run == 1. Is there a reason why this can't happen ?
for this specific case, we can use the park() callback to set should_run to false, no ?
>>> - Now we unregister the stuff and CPU3 again comes online. > > It gets called here from unregister/stop. > >>> - Because it had should_run as true, we again run the thread and Crash. >>> >>> makes sense ? > >>>> +out_rollback_per_cpu: >>>> + for_each_cpu(cpu, to_cpumask(ii_dev->cpumask)) >>>> + per_cpu(idle_injection_device, cpu) = NULL; >>> >>> So if two parts of the kernel call this routine with the same cpumask, then the >>> second call will also overwrite the masks with NULL and return error. That will >>> screw up things a bit here. >> >> Apparently there is a misunderstanding :) >> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/29/209 (at the end) > > Right, your earlier version was doing the right thing :) >
-- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
| |