Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1693272

Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling?

From Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling?
Date 2017-07-21 01:00 +0200
Message-ID <u5sAh-59K-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <u566K-6L0-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <u56q6-77M-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <u5dUC-3XI-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <u5gps-5yL-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <u5kW6-lk-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On 07/20/2017 07:45 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:52:41AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On 20-07-17, 01:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> We have a particular ARM CPU design that is drawing quite a lot of
>>>>> current upon exit from WFI, and it does so in a way even before the
>>>>> first instruction out of WFI is executed. That means we cannot influence
>>>>> directly the exit from WFI other than by changing the state in which it
>>>>> would be previously entered because of this "dead" time during which the
>>>>> internal logic needs to ramp up back where it left.
>>>>>
>>>>> A naive approach to solving this problem because we have CPU frequency
>>>>> scaling available would be to do the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> - just before entering WFI, switch to a low frequency OPP
>>>>> - enter WFI
>>>>> - upon exit from WFI, ramp up the frequency back to e.g: highest OPP
>>>>>
>>>>> Some of the parts that I am not exactly clear on would be:
>>>>>
>>>>> - would that qualify as a cpuidle governor of some kind that ties in
>>>>> which cpufreq?
>>>>> - would using cpufreq_driver_fast_switch() be an appropriate API to use
>>>>> from outside
> 
> Can your ARM part change OPP without scheduling? Because (for obvious
> reasons) the idle thread is not supposed to block.

I think it should be able to do that, but I am not sure that if I went
through the cpufreq API it would be that straight forward so I may have
to re-implement some of the frequency scaling logic outside of cpufreq
(or rather make the low-level parts some kind of library I guess).

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 01:00 +0200
  Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2017-07-20 01:20 +0200
    Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2017-07-20 09:20 +0200
      Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2017-07-20 11:30 +0200
        Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 01:10 +0200
      Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2017-07-20 12:00 +0200
        Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-07-20 16:50 +0200
          Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 01:00 +0200
            Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org> - 2017-07-21 02:20 +0200
              Re: cpuidle and cpufreq coupling? Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 02:40 +0200

csiph-web