From patchwork Mon Dec 7 07:50:27 2015 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Viresh Kumar X-Patchwork-Id: 57757 Delivered-To: patch@linaro.org Received: by 10.112.147.194 with SMTP id tm2csp995569lbb; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 23:50:37 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.66.160.194 with SMTP id xm2mr40860863pab.68.1449474637126; Sun, 06 Dec 2015 23:50:37 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c66si40702342pfd.69.2015.12.06.23.50.36; Sun, 06 Dec 2015 23:50:37 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@linaro-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753373AbbLGHuf (ORCPT + 28 others); Mon, 7 Dec 2015 02:50:35 -0500 Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.220.51]:34384 "EHLO mail-pa0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750775AbbLGHud (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2015 02:50:33 -0500 Received: by pacwq6 with SMTP id wq6so43677335pac.1 for ; Sun, 06 Dec 2015 23:50:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=W/gsSBu9p65jmSXtyERB5orS1HZwLLtGK5OCO7P9m9I=; b=vVB/9TsRY4AfbOuQd3Y1dFyv7SHKeAa7evw4zlt5b8S6qrV2lE17/60F5BoQnIAzYW RzsJMDqGZkyFzaPC3X2+8Pgvt3VJzh3HEIeyp/CfTfQz9+dTSPqoXVt1CbywAwvq6PaR 6iJZv381jqRI1+5bchB/zTQZv9BB55WTWail4GtnFUaMix2YZHRuKZAW4UA78u0qYlT5 yoZiNecRqGE6R/zWqS2HkmebatwyBizq2EEOQ8v488MPqrq0UgyDTEKf2jyAPV1cqLSz MrHt+/Xl8gnElCJSZ5XUjArjgWo7fRPtX5hJOQSEqfl2YXl+xweJgstc33ZeQLBsSEiO EVXw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=W/gsSBu9p65jmSXtyERB5orS1HZwLLtGK5OCO7P9m9I=; b=lZawZinb0HPbwSbUOvyRUl+XTatc3YLr8cBNq1I5DH5LYiYScjg89Mn3TuHkuynigU K587YQJebkjz8mdUPR/uDkk12Eo8AGzX2lz3dGfI43vl61s05lf3r86Rq3glsSosaVP+ kAL8qV7WR7vqgrttioTkVOh+0Ncgp/mT3Dzi8aD6+heK1AjmvztX+Sut7D+KZ6cVN2Rx FB+V5OTjtKE85ZMwvJY7ynd37u/Y3hsrtGo5Epblo+SfNT1HmUWVJ1KyhnFscPxxoROb 5NwK09KC6LKfh4j/btXLugMBNxbEvtIC40+AJCa7EcpSBPskqZ2MJLkRP4HKypzTIcNp 40PA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkbCaigxPJ9lt6jQLQjg0+JD2BBUb5DVfrYYKRuGCCDRsf7ntsPgzR0xXd4l5PSJIQJ+gDS X-Received: by 10.66.180.48 with SMTP id dl16mr40762484pac.39.1449474632665; Sun, 06 Dec 2015 23:50:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([122.167.18.125]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ry1sm32605411pab.30.2015.12.06.23.50.30 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 06 Dec 2015 23:50:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 13:20:27 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, ashwin.chaugule@linaro.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , open list Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 5/6] cpufreq: governor: replace per-cpu delayed work with timers Message-ID: <20151207075027.GC3294@ubuntu> References: <2132445.kEr4nQIvso@vostro.rjw.lan> <20151205041042.GU3430@ubuntu> <1517154.7rUJCu3tN2@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1517154.7rUJCu3tN2@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07-12-15, 02:28, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > What about if that happens in parallel with the decrementation in > dbs_work_handler()? > > Is there anything preventing that from happening? Hmmm, you are right. Following is required for that. > That aside, I think you could avoid using the spinlock altogether if the > counter was atomic (and which would make the above irrelevant too). > > Say, skip_work is atomic the the relevant code in dbs_timer_handler() is > written as > > atomic_inc(&shared->skip_work); > smp_mb__after_atomic(); > if (atomic_read(&shared->skip_work) > 1) > atomic_dec(&shared->skip_work); > else At this point we might end up decrementing skip_work from gov_cancel_work() and then cancel the work which we haven't queued yet. And the end result will be that the work is still queued while gov_cancel_work() has finished. And we have to keep the atomic operation, as well as queue_work() within the lock. > queue_work(system_wq, &shared->work); > > and the remaining incrementation and decrementation of skip_work are replaced > with the corresponding atomic operations, it still should work, no? -- viresh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c index c9e420bd0eec..d8a89e653933 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c @@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ static void dbs_work_handler(struct work_struct *work) struct dbs_data *dbs_data; unsigned int sampling_rate, delay; bool eval_load; + unsigned long flags; policy = shared->policy; dbs_data = policy->governor_data; @@ -257,7 +258,10 @@ static void dbs_work_handler(struct work_struct *work) delay = dbs_data->cdata->gov_dbs_timer(policy, eval_load); mutex_unlock(&shared->timer_mutex); + spin_lock_irqsave(&shared->timer_lock, flags); shared->skip_work--; + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&shared->timer_lock, flags); + gov_add_timers(policy, delay); }