All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>
To: "l.stach@pengutronix.de" <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
	"marc.zyngier@arm.com" <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@nxp.com>, Jacky Bai <ping.bai@nxp.com>
Cc: dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com" <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>,
	"mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"rjw@rjwysocki.net" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	"catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"will.deacon@arm.com" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	"robh@kernel.org" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"shawnguo@kernel.org" <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"sudeep.holla@arm.com" <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Anson Huang <anson.huang@nxp.com>,
	"kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] cpuidle: Add poking mechanism to support non-IPI wakeup
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 18:40:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cb2e5521cc0d29b7c3ac42a6717256ec2e8d35e6.camel@nxp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <85c91392-9cbf-a5fc-b037-3d58f2b0ac9c@arm.com>

On Wed, 2019-03-27 at 17:45 +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 27/03/2019 16:06, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 27.03.2019, 15:57 +0000 schrieb Marc Zyngier:
> > > On 27/03/2019 15:44, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > > > Am Mittwoch, den 27.03.2019, 13:21 +0000 schrieb Abel Vesa:
> > > > > This work is a workaround I'm looking into (more as a background task)
> > > > > in order to add support for cpuidle on i.MX8MQ based platforms.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The main idea here is getting around the missing GIC wake_request signal
> > > > > (due to integration design issue) by waking up a each individual core through
> > > > > some dedicated SW power-up bits inside the power controller (GPC) right before
> > > > > every IPI is requested for that each individual core.
> > > > 
> > > > Just a general comment, without going into the details of this series:
> > > > this issue is not only affecting IPIs, but also MSIs terminated at the
> > > > GIC. Currently MSIs are terminated at the PCIe core, but terminating
> > > > them at the GIC is clearly preferable, as this allows assigning CPU
> > > > affinity to individual MSIs and lowers IRQ service overhead.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not sure what the consequences are for upstream Linux support yet,
> > > > but we should keep in mind that having a workaround for IPIs is only
> > > > solving part of the issue.
> > > 
> > > If this erratum is affecting more than just IPIs, then indeed I don't
> > > see how this patch series solves anything.
> > > 
> > > But the erratum documentation seems to imply that only SGIs are
> > > affected, and goes as far as suggesting to use an external interrupt
> > > would solve it. How comes this is not the case? Or is it that anything
> > > directly routed to a redistributor is also affected? This would break
> > > LPIs (and thus MSIs) and PPIs (the CPU timer, among others).
> > 
> > Anything that isn't visible to the GPC and requires the GIC
> > wake_request signal to behave as specified is broken by this erratum.
> 
> I really wonder how a timer interrupt (a PPI, hence not routed through
> the GPC) can wake up the CPU in this case. It really feels like
> something like "program CNTV_CVAL_EL0 to expire at some later point;
> WFI" could result in the CPU going to a deep sleep state, and not
> wake-up at all.

This is already a common issue for cpuidle implementions handled by the
"local-timer-stop" property. imx has other timer blocks in the SOC,
they generate SPIs which are connected to GPC.

> This would indicate that not only cpuidle is broken with this, but
> absolutely every interrupt that is not routed through the GPC.

Yes, cpuidle is broken for irqs not routed through GPC. However:

* All SPIs are connected to GPC in a 1:1 mapping
* This series deals with SGIs
* The timer PPIs are not required; covered by local-timer-stop
* LPIs are currently unused (I understand imx-pci uses SPI by default
from Lucas)

Anything missing?

My understanding is that this wake request feature via GIC is new in v3
and this is maybe why HW team missed it during integration. Older
imx6/7 has GICv2 and has deep idle states which always rely on GPC to
wakeup so the approach can work.

--
Regards,
Leonard

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>
To: "l.stach@pengutronix.de" <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
	"marc.zyngier@arm.com" <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@nxp.com>, Jacky Bai <ping.bai@nxp.com>
Cc: Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>,
	"mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com" <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Anson Huang <anson.huang@nxp.com>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"rjw@rjwysocki.net" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"will.deacon@arm.com" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	"kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	"sudeep.holla@arm.com" <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>,
	"shawnguo@kernel.org" <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	"robh@kernel.org" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] cpuidle: Add poking mechanism to support non-IPI wakeup
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 18:40:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cb2e5521cc0d29b7c3ac42a6717256ec2e8d35e6.camel@nxp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <85c91392-9cbf-a5fc-b037-3d58f2b0ac9c@arm.com>

On Wed, 2019-03-27 at 17:45 +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 27/03/2019 16:06, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 27.03.2019, 15:57 +0000 schrieb Marc Zyngier:
> > > On 27/03/2019 15:44, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > > > Am Mittwoch, den 27.03.2019, 13:21 +0000 schrieb Abel Vesa:
> > > > > This work is a workaround I'm looking into (more as a background task)
> > > > > in order to add support for cpuidle on i.MX8MQ based platforms.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The main idea here is getting around the missing GIC wake_request signal
> > > > > (due to integration design issue) by waking up a each individual core through
> > > > > some dedicated SW power-up bits inside the power controller (GPC) right before
> > > > > every IPI is requested for that each individual core.
> > > > 
> > > > Just a general comment, without going into the details of this series:
> > > > this issue is not only affecting IPIs, but also MSIs terminated at the
> > > > GIC. Currently MSIs are terminated at the PCIe core, but terminating
> > > > them at the GIC is clearly preferable, as this allows assigning CPU
> > > > affinity to individual MSIs and lowers IRQ service overhead.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not sure what the consequences are for upstream Linux support yet,
> > > > but we should keep in mind that having a workaround for IPIs is only
> > > > solving part of the issue.
> > > 
> > > If this erratum is affecting more than just IPIs, then indeed I don't
> > > see how this patch series solves anything.
> > > 
> > > But the erratum documentation seems to imply that only SGIs are
> > > affected, and goes as far as suggesting to use an external interrupt
> > > would solve it. How comes this is not the case? Or is it that anything
> > > directly routed to a redistributor is also affected? This would break
> > > LPIs (and thus MSIs) and PPIs (the CPU timer, among others).
> > 
> > Anything that isn't visible to the GPC and requires the GIC
> > wake_request signal to behave as specified is broken by this erratum.
> 
> I really wonder how a timer interrupt (a PPI, hence not routed through
> the GPC) can wake up the CPU in this case. It really feels like
> something like "program CNTV_CVAL_EL0 to expire at some later point;
> WFI" could result in the CPU going to a deep sleep state, and not
> wake-up at all.

This is already a common issue for cpuidle implementions handled by the
"local-timer-stop" property. imx has other timer blocks in the SOC,
they generate SPIs which are connected to GPC.

> This would indicate that not only cpuidle is broken with this, but
> absolutely every interrupt that is not routed through the GPC.

Yes, cpuidle is broken for irqs not routed through GPC. However:

* All SPIs are connected to GPC in a 1:1 mapping
* This series deals with SGIs
* The timer PPIs are not required; covered by local-timer-stop
* LPIs are currently unused (I understand imx-pci uses SPI by default
from Lucas)

Anything missing?

My understanding is that this wake request feature via GIC is new in v3
and this is maybe why HW team missed it during integration. Older
imx6/7 has GICv2 and has deep idle states which always rely on GPC to
wakeup so the approach can work.

--
Regards,
Leonard
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-03-27 18:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 80+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-27 13:21 [RFC 0/7] cpuidle: Add poking mechanism to support non-IPI wakeup Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` [RFC 1/7] sched: idle: Add sched get idle state helper Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` [RFC 2/7] cpuidle: Add cpu poke support Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` [RFC 3/7] smp: Poke the cores before requesting IPI Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` [RFC 4/7] psci: Add cpu_poke ops to support core poking Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` [RFC 5/7] cpuidle-arm: Add ops to support poke alonside enter Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` [RFC 6/7] cpuidle-arm: Add arm64 wake helper for cpu_poke op Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21 ` [RFC 7/7] arm64: dts: imx8mq: Add cpu-sleep state with poke wake-up enabled Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 13:21   ` Abel Vesa
2019-03-27 15:44 ` [RFC 0/7] cpuidle: Add poking mechanism to support non-IPI wakeup Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 15:44   ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 15:44   ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 15:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-27 15:57     ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-27 15:57     ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-27 16:06     ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 16:06       ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 16:06       ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 17:00       ` Leonard Crestez
2019-03-27 17:00         ` Leonard Crestez
2019-03-27 17:00         ` Leonard Crestez
2019-03-27 17:11         ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 17:11           ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 17:11           ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 18:13         ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-27 18:13           ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-27 18:13           ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-28 11:21           ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-28 11:21             ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-28 11:21             ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-29  9:11             ` Richard Zhu
2019-03-29  9:11               ` Richard Zhu
2019-03-29  9:11               ` Richard Zhu
2019-03-27 17:45       ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-27 17:45         ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-27 17:45         ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-27 17:55         ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 17:55           ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-27 17:55           ` Lucas Stach
2019-03-28 11:27           ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-28 11:27             ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-28 11:27             ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-27 18:40         ` Leonard Crestez [this message]
2019-03-27 18:40           ` Leonard Crestez
2019-03-27 18:40           ` Leonard Crestez
2019-03-28 10:35           ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-28 10:35             ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-28 10:35             ` Marc Zyngier
2019-03-28 10:36             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-28 10:36               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-28 10:36               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-28 11:55             ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-28 11:55               ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-28 11:55               ` Aisheng Dong
2019-03-28 10:45           ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-03-28 10:45             ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-03-28 10:45             ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-11-06 20:14             ` Florian Fainelli
2019-11-06 20:14               ` Florian Fainelli
2019-11-06 21:31               ` Leonard Crestez
2019-11-06 21:31                 ` Leonard Crestez
2019-11-06 22:10                 ` Florian Fainelli
2019-11-06 22:10                   ` Florian Fainelli
2019-11-06 22:47                   ` Leonard Crestez
2019-11-06 22:47                     ` Leonard Crestez

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=cb2e5521cc0d29b7c3ac42a6717256ec2e8d35e6.camel@nxp.com \
    --to=leonard.crestez@nxp.com \
    --cc=abel.vesa@nxp.com \
    --cc=aisheng.dong@nxp.com \
    --cc=anson.huang@nxp.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=fabio.estevam@nxp.com \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=ping.bai@nxp.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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.