From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
"Saravana Kannan" <skannan@codeaurora.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Lenny Szubowicz" <lszubowi@redhat.com>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"Robert Schöne" <robert.schoene@tu-dresden.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq, store_scaling_governor requires policy->rwsem to be held for duration of changing governors [v2]
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 10:00:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53DF91E2.2020105@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKohpomEQ__Q4xTaBgHJyE0Meu4au-cXKCAKCqHWTHLRL+R5OA@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/04/2014 09:38 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 4 August 2014 17:55, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com> wrote:
>> The issue is the collision between the setup & teardown of the policy's governor
>> sysfs files.
>>
>> On creation the kernel does:
>>
>> down_write(&policy->rwsem)
>> mutex_lock(kernfs_mutex) <- note this is similar to the "old" sysfs_mutex.
>>
>> The opposite happens on a governor switch, specifically the existing governor's
>> exit, and then we get a lockdep warning.
>
> Okay, probably a bit more clarity is what I was looking for. Suppose we try
> to change governor, now tell me what will happen.
>
>> I tried to reproduce with the instructions but was unable to ... ut that was on
>> Friday ;) and I'm going to try again this morning. I've also ping'd some of the
>> engineers here in the office who are working on ARM to get access to a system to
>> do further analysis and testing.
>
> You DON'T need an ARM for that, just try that on any x86 machine which has
> multiple groups of CPUs sharing clock line. Or in other terms there are multiple
> policy structures there..
I do ... I really think I do. Because this is all working on x86 AFAICT.
>
> You just need to enable the flag we were discussing about, it just decided the
> location where governor's directory will get created. Nothing else.
>
That doesn't appear to be correct. I'm testing with the patch that removes the
locking workaround and:
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
index b0c18ed..d86b421 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
@@ -884,6 +884,8 @@ static struct freq_attr *acpi_cpufreq_attr[] = {
};
static struct cpufreq_driver acpi_cpufreq_driver = {
+ .name = "acpi_cpufreq",
+ .flags = CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.target_index = acpi_cpufreq_target,
.bios_limit = acpi_processor_get_bios_limit,
as well as few printk statement sprinkled in the code. I'm doing the following
and on *15* different x86 systems I do not see a problem:
My cpufreq related config is
#
# CPU Frequency scaling
#
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_COMMON=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT=m
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT_DETAILS=y
# CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE is not set
# CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set
# CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND is not set
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_POWERSAVE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_USERSPACE=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND=y
CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_CONSERVATIVE=y
I am doing (from boot)
[root@intel-canoepass-05 cpufreq]# cd /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/cpufreq/
[root@intel-canoepass-05 cpufreq]# ls
affected_cpus cpuinfo_transition_latency scaling_driver
bios_limit freqdomain_cpus scaling_governor
conservative related_cpus scaling_max_freq
cpuinfo_cur_freq scaling_available_frequencies scaling_min_freq
cpuinfo_max_freq scaling_available_governors scaling_setspeed
cpuinfo_min_freq scaling_cur_freq
[root@intel-canoepass-05 cpufreq]# cat conservative/
down_threshold sampling_down_factor up_threshold
freq_step sampling_rate
ignore_nice_load sampling_rate_min
[root@intel-canoepass-05 cpufreq]# cat conservative/down_threshold
20
[root@intel-canoepass-05 cpufreq]# echo ondemand > scaling_governor
[root@intel-canoepass-05 cpufreq]# cat ondemand/up_threshold
95
[root@intel-canoepass-05 cpufreq]# echo conservative > scaling_governor
[root@intel-canoepass-05 cpufreq]#
without any issue. My dmesg (with the printk's) shows
[ 55.331058] cpufreq_set_policy: stopping governor conservative
[ 55.337652] cpufreq_governor_dbs: removing sysfs files for governor conservative
[ 55.346028] cpufreq_set_policy: starting governor ondemand
[ 55.352167] cpufreq_governor_dbs: creating sysfs files for governor ondemand
[ 76.818989] cpufreq_set_policy: stopping governor ondemand
[ 76.825202] cpufreq_governor_dbs: removing sysfs files for governor ondemand
[ 76.833131] cpufreq_set_policy: starting governor conservative
[ 76.839667] cpufreq_governor_dbs: creating sysfs files for governor conservative
There is an already reported LOCKDEP warning in the xfs code that fires at login
so I know LOCKDEP is functional.
Stephen's report as well as the lockup report implies that I should open a file,
-> #1 (&policy->rwsem){+++++.}:
[<c0359234>] kernfs_fop_open+0x138/0x298
[<c02fa3f4>] do_dentry_open.isra.12+0x1b0/0x2f0
[<c02fa604>] finish_open+0x20/0x38
[<c0308d34>] do_last.isra.37+0x5ac/0xb68
[<c03093a4>] path_openat+0xb4/0x5d8
[<c0309bcc>] do_filp_open+0x2c/0x80
[<c02fb558>] do_sys_open+0x10c/0x1c8
[<c020f0a0>] ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x48
and then switch the governor ...
-> #0 (s_active#9){++++..}:
[<c0357d18>] __kernfs_remove+0x250/0x300
[<c0358a94>] kernfs_remove_by_name_ns+0x3c/0x84
[<c035aa78>] remove_files+0x34/0x78
[<c035aee0>] sysfs_remove_group+0x40/0x98
[<c05b0560>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x4c0/0x6ec
[<c05abebc>] __cpufreq_governor+0x118/0x200
[<c05ac0fc>] cpufreq_set_policy+0x158/0x2ac
[<c05ad5e4>] store_scaling_governor+0x6c/0x94
[<c05ab210>] store+0x88/0xb8
[<c035a00c>] sysfs_kf_write+0x4c/0x50
[<c03594d4>] kernfs_fop_write+0xc0/0x180
[<c02fc5c8>] vfs_write+0xa0/0x1a8
[<c02fc9d4>] SyS_write+0x40/0x8c
[<c020f0a0>] ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x48
... right?
P.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-04 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-29 11:46 [PATCH] cpufreq, store_scaling_governor requires policy->rwsem to be held for duration of changing governors [v2] Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-30 0:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-30 14:18 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-30 21:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 1:36 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 2:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 2:07 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 10:16 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 10:21 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 10:23 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 16:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 17:57 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 18:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 18:26 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 20:24 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 20:30 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 20:38 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 21:08 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 22:13 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 22:58 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 0:55 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-01 10:24 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 10:27 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 17:18 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-08-01 19:15 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 19:36 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-08-01 19:43 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 19:54 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-08-01 21:25 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-04 10:11 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-05 7:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-05 10:47 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-05 10:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-05 22:06 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-05 22:20 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-05 22:40 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-05 22:42 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-05 22:51 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-13 19:57 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-13 19:57 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-14 18:16 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-14 18:16 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-06 8:10 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-06 10:09 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-06 10:09 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-06 15:08 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-08-07 6:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-07 10:12 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-07 10:15 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-12 9:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-12 11:33 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-13 7:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-13 9:58 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-13 9:58 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-14 4:19 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-04 10:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-04 12:25 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-04 13:38 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-04 14:00 ` Prarit Bhargava [this message]
2014-08-04 15:04 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-04 20:16 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-05 6:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-05 6:29 ` skannan
2014-08-05 6:43 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-10-13 10:43 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-10-13 11:52 ` Prarit Bhargava
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53DF91E2.2020105@redhat.com \
--to=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lszubowi@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=robert.schoene@tu-dresden.de \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=skannan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.