[PATCH V5 3/9] kernel/cpu_pm: Add runtime PM support for CPUs
From: Ulf Hansson <hidden>
Date: 2017-03-14 07:45:00
Also in:
linux-arm-msm, linux-pm
On 3 March 2017 at 21:41, Lina Iyer [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Notify runtime PM when the CPU is going to be powered off in the idle state. This allows for runtime PM suspend/resume of the CPU as well as its PM domain. Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <redacted> Signed-off-by: Lina Iyer <redacted> --- include/linux/cpuhotplug.h | 1 + kernel/cpu_pm.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 48 insertions(+)diff --git a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h index 921acaa..448226a 100644 --- a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h +++ b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h@@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ enum cpuhp_state { CPUHP_AP_OFFLINE, CPUHP_AP_SCHED_STARTING, CPUHP_AP_RCUTREE_DYING, + CPUHP_AP_CPU_PM_STARTING, CPUHP_AP_IRQ_GIC_STARTING, CPUHP_AP_IRQ_HIP04_STARTING, CPUHP_AP_IRQ_ARMADA_XP_STARTING,diff --git a/kernel/cpu_pm.c b/kernel/cpu_pm.c index 009cc9a..db95ef3 100644 --- a/kernel/cpu_pm.c +++ b/kernel/cpu_pm.c@@ -16,9 +16,12 @@ */ #include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/cpu.h> +#include <linux/cpuhotplug.h> #include <linux/cpu_pm.h> #include <linux/module.h> #include <linux/notifier.h> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h> #include <linux/spinlock.h> #include <linux/syscore_ops.h>@@ -99,6 +102,7 @@ int cpu_pm_enter(void) { int nr_calls; int ret = 0; + struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(smp_processor_id()); read_lock(&cpu_pm_notifier_lock); ret = cpu_pm_notify(CPU_PM_ENTER, -1, &nr_calls);@@ -110,6 +114,10 @@ int cpu_pm_enter(void) cpu_pm_notify(CPU_PM_ENTER_FAILED, nr_calls - 1, NULL); read_unlock(&cpu_pm_notifier_lock); + /* Notify Runtime PM that we are suspending the CPU */ + if (!ret && dev) + RCU_NONIDLE(pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend(dev)); +
I am trying to understand how the runtime PM usage count becomes properly balanced. I believe you could you end up first calling a pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend(), without earlier having called pm_runtime_get*(). I am not sure though, but perhaps you can elaborate. Anyway, in patch2/9, where you enable runtime PM there is only a call to pm_runtime_set_active(), which doesn't increase the usage count. To me, it seems like that change also needs a pm_runtime_get_noresume().
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
return ret; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpu_pm_enter);@@ -129,6 +137,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpu_pm_enter); int cpu_pm_exit(void) { int ret; + struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(smp_processor_id()); + + /* Notify Runtime PM that we are resuming the CPU */ + if (dev) + RCU_NONIDLE(pm_runtime_get_sync(dev)); read_lock(&cpu_pm_notifier_lock); ret = cpu_pm_notify(CPU_PM_EXIT, -1, NULL);@@ -200,6 +213,40 @@ int cpu_cluster_pm_exit(void) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpu_cluster_pm_exit); +#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU +static int cpu_pm_cpu_dying(unsigned int cpu) +{ + struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(cpu); + + if (dev) + pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend(dev); + + return 0; +} + +static int cpu_pm_cpu_starting(unsigned int cpu) +{ + struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(cpu); + + if (dev) + pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
I assume that according to my comment above, you somehow need to compensate for either of the cases when CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU is set or unset. Right?
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int __init cpu_pm_hotplug_init(void)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_CPU_PM_STARTING,
+ "AP_CPU_PM_STARTING",
+ cpu_pm_cpu_starting, cpu_pm_cpu_dying);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+device_initcall(cpu_pm_hotplug_init);
+#endif
+
#ifdef CONFIG_PM
static int cpu_pm_suspend(void)
{
--
2.7.4Kind regards Uffe