Re: [PATCH 1/3] dynticks - implement no idle hz for x86

[Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>]

On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:53:52AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> 
> - include/linux/timer.h
> 	with definitions in kernel/timer.c
> 
> OR better in
> - include/linux/ticksource.h
> 	with definitions in kernel/ticksource.c?

> 
> #define DYN_TICK_ENABLED	(1 << 1)
> #define DYN_TICK_SUITABLE	(1 << 0)
> 
> #define DYN_TICK_MIN_SKIP	2
> 
> /* Abstraction of a tick source

I think "tick source" probably doesn't bring out the fact that we are
also dealing with more than tick source here (@recover_time and 
@set_all_cpus_idle). From this perspective, I feel that the original 
'dyn_tick_timer' name itself was better (atleast it captures the 
'dynamic' nature of ticks).

>  * @state: current state
>  * @max_skip: current maximum number of ticks to skip
>  * @init: initialization routine
>  * @enable_dyn_tick: called via sysfs to enable interrupt skipping
>  * @disable_dyn_tick: called via sysfs to disable interrupt
>  * 				skipping
>  * @set_all_cpus_idle: last cpu to go idle calls this, which should
>  * 				disable any timesource (e.g. PIT on x86)
>  * @recover_time: handler for returning from skipped ticks and keeping
>  * 				time consistent
>  */
> struct tick_source {
> 	unsigned int state;
> 	unsigned long max_skip;
> 	int (*init) (void);
> 	void (*enable_dyn_tick) (void);
> 	void (*disable_dyn_tick) (void);
> 	unsigned long (*reprogram) (unsigned long); /* return number of ticks skipped */

How will it be able to return the number of ticks skipped? Or are you referring
to max_skip here?

> 	unsigned long (*recover_time) (int, void *, struct pt_regs *); /* handler in arm */
> 	/* following empty in UP */
> 	void (*set_all_cpus_idle) (int);

Does 'set' in 'set_all_cpus_idle' signify anything?

> 	spinlock_t lock;

I think the 'lock' fits in nicely here.

> };
> 
> extern void tick_source_register(struct tick_source *new_tick_source);

I tend to prefer the original interface - dyn_tick_register - itself (since 
as I said it captures the dynamic nature of the timer).

> extern struct tick_source *current_ticksource;

In x86-like architectures, there can be multiple ticksources that can
be simultaneously active - ex: APIC and PIT. So one "current_ticksource" 
doesnt capture that fact?

> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_NO_IDLE_HZ /* which means CONFIG_DYNTICK is also on */
> extern void set_tick_max_skip(unsigned long max_skip);
> /* idle_reprogram_tick calls reprogram_tick calls current_ticksource->reprogram()
>  * do we really need the first step? */

If 'idle_reprogram_tick' is the equivalent of 'idle_reprogram_timer' that is 
in the latest patch published by Con, then I think we can avoid the first step 
yes.

> extern void idle_reprogram_tick(void);
> /* return number of ticks skipped, potentially for accounting purposes? */
> extern unsigned long reprogram_tick(void);
> 
> extern struct tick_source * __init arch_select_tick_source(void);
> extern void __init dyn_tick_init(void); /* calls select_tick_source(), verifies source is usable, then calls tick_source_register() */

I presume dyn_tick_init will be in arch-independent code. In that case, how
does it "verify" that the source is usable? Seems like we need arch-hooks
for this as well?

> static inline int dyn_tick_enabled(void)
> {
> 	return (current_ticksource->state & DYN_TICK_ENABLED);
> }
> 
> #else	/* CONFIG_NO_IDLE_HZ */
> static inline void set_tick_max_skip(unsigned long max_skip)
> {
> }
> 
> static inline void idle_reprogram_tick(void)
> {
> }
> 
> static inline unsigned long reprogram_tick(void)
> {
> 	return 0;
> }
> 
> static inline void dyn_tick_init(void)
> {
> }
> 
> static inline int dyn_tick_enabled(void)
> {
> 	return 0;
> }
> #endif	/* CONFIG_NO_IDLE_HZ */
> 
> /* Pick up arch specific header */
> #include <asm/timer.h> /* or <asm/ticksource.h>, depending */
> 
> - sched.c / sched.h
> 	/* do we want these elsewhere? */
> 	cpumask_t no_idle_hz_cpumask;

Could be moved to timer.h/c?

> - each arch-specific file pair needs to provide:
> 	arch_select_tick_source();
> 	appropriate struct tick_source definitions, functions, etc.
> 
> - include/asm-i386/timer.h /* or ticksource.h */
> 	with defines in arch/i386/timer.c /* or ticksource.c */
> 
> - include/asm-arm/arch-omap/timer.h /* or ticksource.h */
> 	with definitions in arch/arm/mach-omap/timer.c /* or ticksource.c */
> 
> - include/asm-s390/timer.h /* or ticksource.h */
> 	with definitions in arch/s390/timer.c /* or ticksource.c */

I somehow consider that we can retain what currently exists - 
include/asm-i386/dyn-tick.h and arch/i386/kernel/dyn-tick.c ..
IMO current abstraction of 'dyn_tick_timer' is good enough to unify all the 
ports of no-idle-hz. We probably need to just iron out the differences between
how ARM and x86 defines this.

As far as the problem of multiple interrupt sources (like APIC, PIT, HPET)
is concerned, it can be completely handled by the architecture code itself and 
it appropriately sets the 'reprogram_timer' member to point to APIC, PIT or 
HPET reprogramming routines. That would also avoid the 
'if (cpu_has_local_apic())' kind of code that exists now.


-- 


Thanks and Regards,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri,
Linux Technology Center,
IBM Software Labs,
Bangalore, INDIA - 560017
-
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/