linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 4/5] cpufreq: Properly handle physical CPU hot-add/hot-remove
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 16:32:27 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKohpokC_ufaGcMeEiaxUrduL+vLYSc2KzCPoR+Aj-CGYALYSg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1406250448-470-5-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org>

On 25 July 2014 06:37, Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> When CPUs are physically added/removed, its cpuX sysfs directory is
> dynamically added/removed. To handle this correctly, the cpufreq sysfs
> nodes also need to be added/removed dynamically.

Hmm, in that case why should we take this thread? I mean, if we do need
to add/remove sysfs links or move kobjects around, what would we achieve
with this patchset?

> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index d9fc6e5..97edf05 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpufreq_policy *, cpufreq_cpu_data_fallback);
>  static DEFINE_RWLOCK(cpufreq_driver_lock);
>  DEFINE_MUTEX(cpufreq_governor_lock);
>  static LIST_HEAD(cpufreq_policy_list);
> +static cpumask_t has_symlink;
>
>  /* This one keeps track of the previously set governor of a removed CPU */
>  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(char[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN], cpufreq_cpu_governor);
> @@ -865,7 +866,10 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>         unsigned int j;
>         int ret = 0;
>
> -       for_each_cpu(j, policy->related_cpus) {
> +       /* Only some of the related CPUs might be present. So, create
> +        * symlinks only for those.
> +        */

Proper styles please.

> +       for_each_cpu_and(j, policy->related_cpus, cpu_present_mask) {
>                 struct device *cpu_dev;
>
>                 if (j == policy->kobj_cpu)
> @@ -877,6 +881,7 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>                                         "cpufreq");
>                 if (ret)
>                         break;
> +               cpumask_set_cpu(j, &has_symlink);
>         }
>         return ret;
>  }
> @@ -1101,9 +1106,6 @@ static int __cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
>         unsigned long flags;
>         bool recover_policy = cpufreq_suspended;
>
> -       if (cpu_is_offline(cpu))
> -               return 0;
> -

Why?

>         pr_debug("adding CPU %u\n", cpu);
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> @@ -1111,7 +1113,19 @@ static int __cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
>          * CPU because it is in the same boat. */
>         policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>         if (policy) {
> -               if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus))
> +               /* If a CPU gets physically plugged in after one or more of
> +                * its related CPUs are ONLINE, we need to create a symlink
> +                * for it since it wouldn't have been created when the policy
> +                * was initialized. Do this as soon as it's plugged in.
> +                */
> +               if (sif && !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &has_symlink)) {

Why check for sif?

> +                       ret = sysfs_create_link(&dev->kobj, &policy->kobj,
> +                                               "cpufreq");
> +                       if (!ret)
> +                               cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &has_symlink);
> +               }
> +

Move all this to cpufreq_add_policy_cpu()..

> +               if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus) && cpu_online(cpu))
>                         ret = cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(policy, cpu, dev);
>                 else
>                         ret = 0;
> @@ -1120,6 +1134,9 @@ static int __cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
>         }
>  #endif
>
> +       if (cpu_is_offline(cpu))
> +               return 0;
> +

Don't know why we moved it here.. cpufreq_add_dev will only be called for
online CPUs..

>         if (!down_read_trylock(&cpufreq_rwsem))
>                 return 0;
>
> @@ -1303,25 +1320,24 @@ static int cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>                                            unsigned int old_cpu)
>  {
>         struct device *cpu_dev;
> +       unsigned int new_cpu;
>         int ret;
>
>         /* first sibling now owns the new sysfs dir */
> -       cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpumask_any_but(policy->cpus, old_cpu));
> +       for_each_cpu_and(new_cpu, policy->related_cpus, cpu_present_mask)
> +               if (new_cpu != old_cpu)
> +                       break;
> +       cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(new_cpu);
>
>         sysfs_remove_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
>         ret = kobject_move(&policy->kobj, &cpu_dev->kobj);
>         if (ret) {
>                 pr_err("%s: Failed to move kobj: %d\n", __func__, ret);
> -
> -               down_write(&policy->rwsem);
> -               cpumask_set_cpu(old_cpu, policy->cpus);
> -               up_write(&policy->rwsem);
> -
>                 ret = sysfs_create_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, &policy->kobj,
>                                         "cpufreq");
> -
>                 return -EINVAL;
>         }
> +       cpumask_clear_cpu(new_cpu, &has_symlink);
>         policy->kobj_cpu = cpu_dev->id;
>
>         return cpu_dev->id;
> @@ -1407,8 +1423,12 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(struct device *dev,
>         cpus = cpumask_weight(policy->cpus);
>         up_read(&policy->rwsem);
>
> -       if (cpu != policy->kobj_cpu)
> +       if (cpu != policy->kobj_cpu) {
>                 sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
> +               cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &has_symlink);
> +       } else {
> +               cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(policy, cpu);
> +       }

This has_symlink thing has made it much more complicated..

  reply	other threads:[~2014-08-07 11:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-10  2:37 [PATCH] cpufreq: Don't destroy/realloc policy/sysfs on hotplug/suspend Saravana Kannan
2014-07-11  4:18 ` [PATCH v2] " Saravana Kannan
2014-07-11  6:19   ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-11  9:59     ` skannan at codeaurora.org
2014-07-11 10:07       ` skannan at codeaurora.org
2014-07-11 10:52       ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-12  2:44         ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-14  6:09           ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-14 19:08             ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-15  4:35               ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-15  5:36                 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-15  5:52                   ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-15  6:58                   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-07-15 17:35                     ` skannan at codeaurora.org
2014-07-16  7:44                       ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-07-16  5:44                     ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16  7:49                       ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-07-12  3:06     ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-14  6:13       ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-14 19:10         ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-11  7:43   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-07-11 10:02     ` skannan at codeaurora.org
2014-07-15 22:47   ` [PATCH v3 0/2] Simplify hotplug/suspend handling Saravana Kannan
2014-07-15 22:47     ` [PATCH v3 1/2] cpufreq: Don't destroy/realloc policy/sysfs on hotplug/suspend Saravana Kannan
2014-07-16  0:28       ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-16  8:30         ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16 19:19           ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-16  8:24       ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16 11:16         ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-07-16 13:13           ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16 18:04             ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-07-16 19:56             ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-17  5:51               ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16 19:56           ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-17  5:35             ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-18  3:25               ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-18  4:19                 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16 20:25         ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-16 21:45           ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-17  6:24           ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16 14:29       ` Dirk Brandewie
2014-07-16 15:28         ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16 19:42           ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-15 22:47     ` [PATCH v3 2/2] cpufreq: Simplify and fix mutual exclusion with hotplug Saravana Kannan
2014-07-16  8:48       ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-16 19:34         ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-25  1:07     ` [PATCH v4 0/5] Simplify hotplug/suspend handling Saravana Kannan
2014-07-25  1:07       ` [PATCH v4 1/5] cpufreq: Don't wait for CPU to going offline to restart governor Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 20:47         ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-25  1:07       ` [PATCH v4 2/5] cpufreq: Keep track of which CPU owns the kobj/sysfs nodes separately Saravana Kannan
2014-08-07  9:02         ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-25  1:07       ` [PATCH v4 3/5] cpufreq: Don't destroy/realloc policy/sysfs on hotplug/suspend Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 21:56         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 22:15           ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 23:48           ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-07 10:51           ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-12  9:17             ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-07 10:48         ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-11 22:13           ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-12  8:51             ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-25  1:07       ` [PATCH v4 4/5] cpufreq: Properly handle physical CPU hot-add/hot-remove Saravana Kannan
2014-08-07 11:02         ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2014-08-11 22:15           ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-25  1:07       ` [PATCH v4 5/5] cpufreq: Delete dead code related to policy save/restore Saravana Kannan
2014-08-07 11:06         ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-29  5:52       ` [PATCH v4 0/5] Simplify hotplug/suspend handling skannan at codeaurora.org
2014-07-30  0:29       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 20:25         ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-07  6:04         ` skannan at codeaurora.org
2014-10-16  8:53       ` Viresh Kumar
2014-10-23 21:41         ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-16 22:02 ` [PATCH] cpufreq: Don't destroy/realloc policy/sysfs on hotplug/suspend Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-16 22:35   ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-24  3:02   ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-24  5:04     ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-24  9:12       ` skannan at codeaurora.org

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=CAKohpokC_ufaGcMeEiaxUrduL+vLYSc2KzCPoR+Aj-CGYALYSg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).