Thread (40 messages) 40 messages, 7 authors, 2021-12-09

Re: [PATCH 5/7] thermal: intel: hfi: Enable notification interrupt

From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2021-11-08 09:10:20
Also in: linux-doc, lkml

On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 06:33:10PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -72,6 +78,9 @@ struct hfi_instance {
 	u16			die_id;
 	struct cpumask		*cpus;
 	void			*hw_table;
+	struct delayed_work	update_work;
+	raw_spinlock_t		event_lock;
  +	raw_spinlock_t		interrupt_lock;
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+	u64			timestamp;
 	bool			initialized;
 };
 
@@ -114,6 +123,75 @@ static struct hfi_instance *hfi_instances;
 static struct hfi_features hfi_features;
 static DEFINE_MUTEX(hfi_lock);
 
+#define HFI_UPDATE_INTERVAL	HZ
+
+static void hfi_update_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
+{
+	struct hfi_instance *hfi_instance;
+
+	hfi_instance = container_of(to_delayed_work(work), struct hfi_instance,
+				    update_work);
+	if (!hfi_instance)
+		return;
+
+	/* TODO: Consume update here. */
	// this here uses ->event_lock to serialize against the
	// interrupt below changing the data...
+}
+
+void intel_hfi_process_event(__u64 pkg_therm_status_msr_val)
+{
+	struct hfi_instance *hfi_instance;
+	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
+	struct hfi_cpu_info *info;
+	unsigned long flags;
+	u64 timestamp;
+
+	if (!pkg_therm_status_msr_val)
+		return;
+
+	info = &per_cpu(hfi_cpu_info, cpu);
+	if (!info)
+		return;
+
+	/*
+	 * It is possible that we get an HFI thermal interrupt on this CPU
+	 * before its HFI instance is initialized. This is not a problem. The
+	 * CPU that enabled the interrupt for this package will also get the
+	 * interrupt and is fully initialized.
+	 */
+	hfi_instance = info->hfi_instance;
+	if (!hfi_instance)
+		return;
+
	/*
	 * If someone is already handling the interrupt, we shouldn't be
	 * burning time waiting for them to then do more nothing.
	 */
	if (!raw_spin_trylock(&hfi_instance->interrupt_lock))
		return;

+	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&hfi_instance->event_lock, flags);
+
+	/*
+	 * On most systems, all CPUs in the package receive a package-level
+	 * thermal interrupt when there is an HFI update. Since they all are
+	 * dealing with the same update (as indicated by the update timestamp),
+	 * it is sufficient to let a single CPU to acknowledge the update and
+	 * schedule work to process it.
+	 */
+	timestamp = *(u64 *)hfi_instance->hw_table;
+	if (hfi_instance->timestamp >= timestamp)
+		goto unlock_spinlock;
This can go the way of the dodo.
+
+	hfi_instance->timestamp = timestamp;
+
+	memcpy(hfi_instance->table_base, hfi_instance->hw_table,
+	       hfi_features.nr_table_pages << PAGE_SHIFT);
+	/*
+	 * Let hardware and other CPUs know that we are done reading the HFI
+	 * table and it is free to update it again.
+	 */
+	pkg_therm_status_msr_val &= THERM_STATUS_CLEAR_PKG_MASK &
+				    ~PACKAGE_THERM_STATUS_HFI_UPDATED;
+	wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_PACKAGE_THERM_STATUS, pkg_therm_status_msr_val);
+	schedule_delayed_work(&hfi_instance->update_work, HFI_UPDATE_INTERVAL);
+
+unlock_spinlock:
+	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hfi_instance->event_lock, flags);
	raw_spin_unlock(&hfi_instance->interrupt_lock);
+}
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help