Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
	linux@armlinux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mingo@redhat.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] arch_topology: disable frequency invariance for CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 10:01:00 +0100
Message-ID: <20200810090100.GA7190@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200804063046.a2hw5cxwiewhb3aw@vireshk-mac-ubuntu>

Hi guys,

On Tuesday 04 Aug 2020 at 12:00:46 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 30-07-20, 12:29, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> > On 30/07/2020 06:24, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 22-07-20, 10:37, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> > >> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > >> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ __weak bool arch_freq_counters_available(struct cpumask *cpus)
> > >>  }
> > >>  DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, freq_scale) = SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE;
> > >>  
> > >> +#ifndef CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER
> > >>  void arch_set_freq_scale(struct cpumask *cpus, unsigned long cur_freq,
> > >>  			 unsigned long max_freq)
> > >>  {
> > >> @@ -46,6 +47,7 @@ void arch_set_freq_scale(struct cpumask *cpus, unsigned long cur_freq,
> > >>  	for_each_cpu(i, cpus)
> > >>  		per_cpu(freq_scale, i) = scale;
> > >>  }
> > >> +#endif
> > > 
> > > I don't really like this change, the ifdef hackery is disgusting and
> > > then we are putting that in a completely different part of the kernel.
> > > 
> > > There are at least these two ways of solving this, maybe more:
> > > 
> > > - Fix the bl switcher driver and add the complexity in it (which you
> > >   tried to do earlier).
> > > 
> > > - Add a cpufreq flag to skip arch-set-freq-scale call.
> > 
> > I agree it's not nice but IMHO the cpufreq flag is worse since we would
> > introduce new infrastructure only for a deprecated feature. I'm assuming
> > that BL SWITCHER is the only feature needing this CPUfreq flag extension.
> > 
> > #ifdef CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER is already in drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c so
> > it's ugly already.
> > 
> > Runtime detecting (via bL_switching_enabled) of BL SWITCHER is right now
> > also only handled inside vexpress-spc-cpufreq.c via a
> > bL_switcher_notifier. A mechanism which also sits behind a #ifdef
> > CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER.
> 
> Vexpress one is a driver and so ugliness could be ignored here :)
> 
> So here is option number 3 (in continuation of the earlier two
> options):
> - Don't do anything for bL switcher, just add a TODO/NOTE in the
>   driver that FIE is broken for switcher. And I don't think anyone
>   will care about FIE for the switcher anyway :)
> 

I gave it a bit of time in case anyone had strong opinions about this,
but given the lack of those, what I can do in this series is the
following: ignore the problem :). This issue was there before these
patches and it will continue to be there after these patches - nothing
changes.

Separately from this series, I can submit a patch with Viresh's
suggestion above and we can spin around a bit discussing this, if there
is interest. My opinion on this is that option 1 is ugly but it does fix
an issue in a relatively non-invasive way. I agree with "I don't think
anyone will care about FIE for the switcher anyway", but for me this
means that nobody will care if it's supported (and therefore option 1
is the proper solution). But if bL switcher is used, I think people might
care if it's broken, as it results in incorrect scheduler signals.
Therefore, I would not like leaving it broken (option 3). If it's not
used, option 2 is obvious.


Many thanks,
Ionela.

> -- 
> viresh

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

  reply index

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-22  9:37 [PATCH v2 0/7] cpufreq: improve frequency invariance support Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-22  9:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] cpufreq: move invariance setter calls in cpufreq core Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-27 13:48   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-07-29  9:03     ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-30  3:41     ` Viresh Kumar
2020-08-03 13:26       ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-08-03 13:46         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-08-03 14:16           ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-22  9:37 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] cpufreq: set invariance scale factor on transition end Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-27 13:52   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-07-29  9:14     ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-30  4:13   ` Viresh Kumar
2020-08-03 13:58     ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-08-04  6:26       ` Viresh Kumar
2020-08-05 10:35         ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-22  9:37 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] arch_topology: disable frequency invariance for CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-30  4:24   ` Viresh Kumar
2020-07-30 10:29     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-07-31 15:48       ` Sudeep Holla
2020-08-03 14:39         ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-08-04  6:30       ` Viresh Kumar
2020-08-10  9:01         ` Ionela Voinescu [this message]
2020-07-22  9:37 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] cpufreq: report whether cpufreq supports Frequency Invariance (FI) Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-27 14:02   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-07-29 14:39     ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-30  4:43   ` Viresh Kumar
2020-08-03 15:24     ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-08-04  6:46       ` Viresh Kumar
2020-08-05 10:35         ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-22  9:37 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] arch_topology, cpufreq, sched/core: constify arch_* cpumasks Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-30 11:43   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-07-22  9:37 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] arch_topology, arm, arm64: define arch_scale_freq_invariant() Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-30 11:44   ` [PATCH v2 6/7] arch_topology,arm,arm64: " Catalin Marinas
2020-07-22  9:37 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] cpufreq: make schedutil the default for arm and arm64 Ionela Voinescu
2020-07-30  4:54   ` Viresh Kumar

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=20200810090100.GA7190@arm.com \
    --to=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.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

Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/0 linux-arm-kernel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1 linux-arm-kernel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-arm-kernel linux-arm-kernel/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel \
		linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
	public-inbox-index linux-arm-kernel

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git