From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753649AbbETUQD (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 20 May 2015 16:16:03 -0400
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:46683 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752356AbbETUP7 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 20 May 2015 16:15:59 -0400
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 22:15:54 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>,
        Tony Li <tony.li@amd.com>,
        =?utf-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYw==?= Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] x86, mwaitt: introduce mwaitx idle with a
 configurable timer
Message-ID: <20150520201553.GI3645@pd.tnic>
References: <20150520102258.GA21245@gmail.com>
 <20150520105032.GD3645@pd.tnic>
 <20150520111120.GA25215@gmail.com>
 <20150520112110.GG3645@pd.tnic>
 <20150520114125.GA31212@gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.11.1505201518050.4225@nanos>
 <20150520145122.GB10374@gmail.com>
 <20150520165558.24bf2483@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
 <20150520160702.GH3645@pd.tnic>
 <alpine.DEB.2.11.1505202105110.4225@nanos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1505202105110.4225@nanos>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 09:12:15PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Which would be good enough for mdelay/udelay I think, but we'd need to
> measure the time spend in MWAITT so we wont return early.
> 
> Something like this:

Yeah, with a check maybe:

> 	  delay = usec_to_tsc(delay_usec);

	if (delay > ((1 << 32) - 1)) {
		mdelay(delay_usec);
		return;
	}

> 	  end = rdtsc() + delay;
> 	  while (1) {

I guess
		monitorx( ...);

first.

> 		MWAITT(delay);
> 		now = rdtsc();
> 		if (end <= now)
> 		   	  break;
> 		delay = end - now;
> 	}
> 
> Now we'd need to add alternatives or some other mechanism to it to
> make this conditionally for those machines.

alternative_call(mdelay, mdelayx, X86_FEATURE_MWAITT, /* no output */, timeout);

Something like that maybe.

> Not sure if it's worth the trouble.

Could be a use case for MWAITX in the kernel!

:-D

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--