From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C817AC388F7 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76B5D24654 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:53:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1603414423; bh=H7BSQBTeld9dIe7VZCTb35eY55DnK0do+KNc0IrodUk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=fANhS1wht9xRk55c99clf7pE/e7GCsjV2BGT5u/PbusR9F49cVsJHCasZHl7m5hEc hetKWAiU3qW0c4lUwH1KiVTalmOMVaNtbTZeZO9Ok/US2AHj3UhZU/mHW/+2kD1euw dYzbY1z0M9eyDTc+r4cD7HU5X6oNLbTixbX3QnPE= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S374154AbgJWAxm (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2020 20:53:42 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:39894 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2900356AbgJWAxm (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2020 20:53:42 -0400 Received: from google.com (unknown [104.132.1.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F32D124630; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:53:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1603414421; bh=H7BSQBTeld9dIe7VZCTb35eY55DnK0do+KNc0IrodUk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=KiTUVx2RfDCA18tppCH65YVG0kmUIN5GraBTZpBsOQPBOViAOA9Juk8PIjQi+atQN 61CEirviHxZKb4fqSblB6roOvMSesxvdvLhFKL8z+r541lpvuGJeriXLlqXR21MXLB 7PLtXs+iuiy+ZJ0isFZV/Uz6wqy8jkvpQkou4eKM= Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:53:39 -0700 From: Jaegeuk Kim To: Can Guo Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, kernel-team@android.com, Alim Akhtar , Avri Altman Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] scsi: ufs: fix clkgating on/off correctly Message-ID: <20201022201825.GA3329812@google.com> References: <20201020195258.2005605-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <20201020195258.2005605-6-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <2a8ecc4185b3a5411077f4e3fc66000f@codeaurora.org> <20201021045213.GB3004521@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/21, Can Guo wrote: > On 2020-10-21 12:52, jaegeuk@kernel.org wrote: > > On 10/21, Can Guo wrote: > > > On 2020-10-21 03:52, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > The below call stack prevents clk_gating at every IO completion. > > > > We can remove the condition, ufshcd_any_tag_in_use(), since > > > > clkgating_work > > > > will check it again. > > > > > > > > > > I think checking ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() in either ufshcd_release() or > > > gate_work() can break UFS clk gating's functionality. > > > > > > ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() was introduced to replace hba->lrb_in_use. > > > However, > > > they are not exactly same - ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() returns true if > > > any tag > > > assigned from block layer is still in use, but tags are released > > > asynchronously > > > (through block softirq), meaning it does not reflect the real > > > occupation of > > > UFS host. > > > That is after UFS host finishes all tasks, ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() > > > can still > > > return true. > > > > > > This change only removes the check of ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() in > > > ufshcd_release(), > > > but having the check of it in gate_work() can still prevent gating > > > from > > > happening. > > > The current change works for you maybe because the tags are release > > > before > > > hba->clk_gating.delay_ms expires, but if hba->clk_gating.delay_ms is > > > shorter > > > or > > > somehow block softirq is retarded, gate_work() may have chance to see > > > ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() > > > returns true. What do you think? > > > > I don't think this breaks clkgating, but fix the wrong condition check > > which > > prevented gate_work at all. As you mentioned, even if this schedules > > gate_work > > by racy conditions, gate_work will handle it as a last resort. > > > > If clocks cannot be gated after the last task is cleared from UFS host, then > clk gating > is broken, no? Assume UFS has completed the last task in its queue, as this > change says, > ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() is preventing ufshcd_release() from invoking > gate_work(). > Similarly, ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() can prevent gate_work() from doing its > real work - > disabling the clocks. Do you agree? > > if (hba->clk_gating.active_reqs > || hba->ufshcd_state != UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL > || ufshcd_any_tag_in_use(hba) || hba->outstanding_tasks > || hba->active_uic_cmd || hba->uic_async_done) > goto rel_lock; I see the point, but this happens only when clkgate_delay_ms is too short to give enough time for releasing tag. If it's correctly set, I think there'd be no problem, unless softirq was delayed by other RT threads which is just a corner case tho. > > Thanks, > > Can Guo. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Can Guo. > > > > > > In __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl > > > Ihba->lrb_in_use is cleared immediately when UFS driver > > > finishes all tasks > > > > > > > ufshcd_complete_requests(struct ufs_hba *hba) > > > > ufshcd_transfer_req_compl() > > > > __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl() > > > > __ufshcd_release(hba) > > > > if (ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() == 1) > > > > return; > > > > ufshcd_tmc_handler(hba); > > > > blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter(); > > > > > > > > Cc: Alim Akhtar > > > > Cc: Avri Altman > > > > Cc: Can Guo > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim > > > > --- > > > > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > > > index b5ca0effe636..cecbd4ace8b4 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > > > @@ -1746,7 +1746,7 @@ static void __ufshcd_release(struct ufs_hba *hba) > > > > > > > > if (hba->clk_gating.active_reqs || hba->clk_gating.is_suspended || > > > > hba->ufshcd_state != UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL || > > > > - ufshcd_any_tag_in_use(hba) || hba->outstanding_tasks || > > > > + hba->outstanding_tasks || > > > > hba->active_uic_cmd || hba->uic_async_done) > > > > return; From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5503C388F7 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:54:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 192B824630; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:54:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="fFwhWw1O"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="eJV2prBx"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="KiTUVx2R" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 192B824630 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kVlLC-0000mY-7g; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:53:58 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kVlLA-0000mG-CO for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:53:56 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Lb4LOPGFaN4uX24wCTh2+lzluGSUg2AXc4VIIMD1uo4=; b=fFwhWw1O0jsvgUGNbsqT3yJdBP 9iQcVfJp2TPSIkMMdWPX/LAcxev81mQlVSZfTFAhhuQ/0wCCUMfKMJvpOkwhulDqLhezy9BFoBfDr 79YwkdvVqv4w2/Igddbzz7DrDT7ukIgZKBjKViUz0kBvRQG98VOnU1ELqqKv+taw1xYE=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To :From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Lb4LOPGFaN4uX24wCTh2+lzluGSUg2AXc4VIIMD1uo4=; b=eJV2prBxOpEQQUb9udzIlzFLMr 5T1fNxyD49kVnwq9roZH0JbOmgH2N7RgJC3ieqWooW4q7fcnJGhnbcJ1be6a2aKBCAc7mIVLoYz10 kRMkpbaTh1Ro+PMMsLv1NdGhQkVSMqIWTj6HWyZ3zXbiOfMqLuVwxhRv2JJ/oUyP8paI=; Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by sfi-mx-3.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1kVlL5-003IVy-LZ for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:53:56 +0000 Received: from google.com (unknown [104.132.1.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F32D124630; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 00:53:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1603414421; bh=H7BSQBTeld9dIe7VZCTb35eY55DnK0do+KNc0IrodUk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=KiTUVx2RfDCA18tppCH65YVG0kmUIN5GraBTZpBsOQPBOViAOA9Juk8PIjQi+atQN 61CEirviHxZKb4fqSblB6roOvMSesxvdvLhFKL8z+r541lpvuGJeriXLlqXR21MXLB 7PLtXs+iuiy+ZJ0isFZV/Uz6wqy8jkvpQkou4eKM= Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:53:39 -0700 From: Jaegeuk Kim To: Can Guo Message-ID: <20201022201825.GA3329812@google.com> References: <20201020195258.2005605-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <20201020195258.2005605-6-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <2a8ecc4185b3a5411077f4e3fc66000f@codeaurora.org> <20201021045213.GB3004521@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Headers-End: 1kVlL5-003IVy-LZ Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] scsi: ufs: fix clkgating on/off correctly X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Avri Altman , Alim Akhtar , kernel-team@android.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 10/21, Can Guo wrote: > On 2020-10-21 12:52, jaegeuk@kernel.org wrote: > > On 10/21, Can Guo wrote: > > > On 2020-10-21 03:52, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > The below call stack prevents clk_gating at every IO completion. > > > > We can remove the condition, ufshcd_any_tag_in_use(), since > > > > clkgating_work > > > > will check it again. > > > > > > > > > > I think checking ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() in either ufshcd_release() or > > > gate_work() can break UFS clk gating's functionality. > > > > > > ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() was introduced to replace hba->lrb_in_use. > > > However, > > > they are not exactly same - ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() returns true if > > > any tag > > > assigned from block layer is still in use, but tags are released > > > asynchronously > > > (through block softirq), meaning it does not reflect the real > > > occupation of > > > UFS host. > > > That is after UFS host finishes all tasks, ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() > > > can still > > > return true. > > > > > > This change only removes the check of ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() in > > > ufshcd_release(), > > > but having the check of it in gate_work() can still prevent gating > > > from > > > happening. > > > The current change works for you maybe because the tags are release > > > before > > > hba->clk_gating.delay_ms expires, but if hba->clk_gating.delay_ms is > > > shorter > > > or > > > somehow block softirq is retarded, gate_work() may have chance to see > > > ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() > > > returns true. What do you think? > > > > I don't think this breaks clkgating, but fix the wrong condition check > > which > > prevented gate_work at all. As you mentioned, even if this schedules > > gate_work > > by racy conditions, gate_work will handle it as a last resort. > > > > If clocks cannot be gated after the last task is cleared from UFS host, then > clk gating > is broken, no? Assume UFS has completed the last task in its queue, as this > change says, > ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() is preventing ufshcd_release() from invoking > gate_work(). > Similarly, ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() can prevent gate_work() from doing its > real work - > disabling the clocks. Do you agree? > > if (hba->clk_gating.active_reqs > || hba->ufshcd_state != UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL > || ufshcd_any_tag_in_use(hba) || hba->outstanding_tasks > || hba->active_uic_cmd || hba->uic_async_done) > goto rel_lock; I see the point, but this happens only when clkgate_delay_ms is too short to give enough time for releasing tag. If it's correctly set, I think there'd be no problem, unless softirq was delayed by other RT threads which is just a corner case tho. > > Thanks, > > Can Guo. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Can Guo. > > > > > > In __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl > > > Ihba->lrb_in_use is cleared immediately when UFS driver > > > finishes all tasks > > > > > > > ufshcd_complete_requests(struct ufs_hba *hba) > > > > ufshcd_transfer_req_compl() > > > > __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl() > > > > __ufshcd_release(hba) > > > > if (ufshcd_any_tag_in_use() == 1) > > > > return; > > > > ufshcd_tmc_handler(hba); > > > > blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter(); > > > > > > > > Cc: Alim Akhtar > > > > Cc: Avri Altman > > > > Cc: Can Guo > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim > > > > --- > > > > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > > > index b5ca0effe636..cecbd4ace8b4 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > > > @@ -1746,7 +1746,7 @@ static void __ufshcd_release(struct ufs_hba *hba) > > > > > > > > if (hba->clk_gating.active_reqs || hba->clk_gating.is_suspended || > > > > hba->ufshcd_state != UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL || > > > > - ufshcd_any_tag_in_use(hba) || hba->outstanding_tasks || > > > > + hba->outstanding_tasks || > > > > hba->active_uic_cmd || hba->uic_async_done) > > > > return; _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel