linux/drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c

673 lines
19 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
/*
* linux/drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
*
* Copyright (C) 2012 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd(http://www.samsung.com)
*
* Copyright (C) 2012-2018 Linaro Limited.
*
* Authors: Amit Daniel <amit.kachhap@linaro.org>
* Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
*
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
*/
#include <linux/cpu.h>
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
#include <linux/cpu_cooling.h>
#include <linux/device.h>
#include <linux/energy_model.h>
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
#include <linux/err.h>
#include <linux/export.h>
#include <linux/pm_opp.h>
#include <linux/pm_qos.h>
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/thermal.h>
PM: EM: convert power field to micro-Watts precision and align drivers The milli-Watts precision causes rounding errors while calculating efficiency cost for each OPP. This is especially visible in the 'simple' Energy Model (EM), where the power for each OPP is provided from OPP framework. This can cause some OPPs to be marked inefficient, while using micro-Watts precision that might not happen. Update all EM users which access 'power' field and assume the value is in milli-Watts. Solve also an issue with potential overflow in calculation of energy estimation on 32bit machine. It's needed now since the power value (thus the 'cost' as well) are higher. Example calculation which shows the rounding error and impact: power = 'dyn-power-coeff' * volt_mV * volt_mV * freq_MHz power_a_uW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^6 = 18000 power_a_mW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^9 = 18 power_b_uW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^6 = 21961 power_b_mW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^9 = 21 max_freq = 2000MHz cost_a_mW = 18 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72 cost_a_uW = 18000 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72000 cost_b_mW = 21 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 70 // <- artificially better cost_b_uW = 21961 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 73203 The 'cost_b_mW' (which is based on old milli-Watts) is misleadingly better that the 'cost_b_uW' (this patch uses micro-Watts) and such would have impact on the 'inefficient OPPs' information in the Cpufreq framework. This patch set removes the rounding issue. Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2022-07-07 15:15:52 +08:00
#include <linux/units.h>
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
#include <trace/events/thermal.h>
/*
* Cooling state <-> CPUFreq frequency
*
* Cooling states are translated to frequencies throughout this driver and this
* is the relation between them.
*
* Highest cooling state corresponds to lowest possible frequency.
*
* i.e.
* level 0 --> 1st Max Freq
* level 1 --> 2nd Max Freq
* ...
*/
/**
* struct time_in_idle - Idle time stats
* @time: previous reading of the absolute time that this cpu was idle
* @timestamp: wall time of the last invocation of get_cpu_idle_time_us()
*/
struct time_in_idle {
u64 time;
u64 timestamp;
};
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
/**
* struct cpufreq_cooling_device - data for cooling device with cpufreq
* @last_load: load measured by the latest call to cpufreq_get_requested_power()
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
* @cpufreq_state: integer value representing the current state of cpufreq
* cooling devices.
* @max_level: maximum cooling level. One less than total number of valid
* cpufreq frequencies.
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
* @em: Reference on the Energy Model of the device
* @cdev: thermal_cooling_device pointer to keep track of the
* registered cooling device.
* @policy: cpufreq policy.
* @cooling_ops: cpufreq callbacks to thermal cooling device ops
* @idle_time: idle time stats
* @qos_req: PM QoS contraint to apply
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
*
* This structure is required for keeping information of each registered
* cpufreq_cooling_device.
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
*/
struct cpufreq_cooling_device {
u32 last_load;
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
unsigned int cpufreq_state;
unsigned int max_level;
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
struct em_perf_domain *em;
struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
struct thermal_cooling_device_ops cooling_ops;
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
#ifndef CONFIG_SMP
struct time_in_idle *idle_time;
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
#endif
cpufreq: Use per-policy frequency QoS Replace the CPU device PM QoS used for the management of min and max frequency constraints in cpufreq (and its users) with per-policy frequency QoS to avoid problems with cpufreq policies covering more then one CPU. Namely, a cpufreq driver is registered with the subsys interface which calls cpufreq_add_dev() for each CPU, starting from CPU0, so currently the PM QoS notifiers are added to the first CPU in the policy (i.e. CPU0 in the majority of cases). In turn, when the cpufreq driver is unregistered, the subsys interface doing that calls cpufreq_remove_dev() for each CPU, starting from CPU0, and the PM QoS notifiers are only removed when cpufreq_remove_dev() is called for the last CPU in the policy, say CPUx, which as a rule is not CPU0 if the policy covers more than one CPU. Then, the PM QoS notifiers cannot be removed, because CPUx does not have them, and they are still there in the device PM QoS notifiers list of CPU0, which prevents new PM QoS notifiers from being registered for CPU0 on the next attempt to register the cpufreq driver. The same issue occurs when the first CPU in the policy goes offline before unregistering the driver. After this change it does not matter which CPU is the policy CPU at the driver registration time and whether or not it is online all the time, because the frequency QoS is per policy and not per CPU. Fixes: 67d874c3b2c6 ("cpufreq: Register notifiers with the PM QoS framework") Reported-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> Tested-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> Reported-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Tested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Diagnosed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/5ad2624194baa2f53acc1f1e627eb7684c577a19.1562210705.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org/T/#md2d89e95906b8c91c15f582146173dce2e86e99f Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20191017094612.6tbkwoq4harsjcqv@vireshk-i7/T/#m30d48cc23b9a80467fbaa16e30f90b3828a5a29b Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
2019-10-16 18:47:06 +08:00
struct freq_qos_request qos_req;
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
};
#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL_GOV_POWER_ALLOCATOR
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
/**
* get_level: Find the level for a particular frequency
* @cpufreq_cdev: cpufreq_cdev for which the property is required
* @freq: Frequency
*
* Return: level corresponding to the frequency.
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
*/
static unsigned long get_level(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev,
unsigned int freq)
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
{
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
int i;
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
for (i = cpufreq_cdev->max_level - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
if (freq > cpufreq_cdev->em->table[i].frequency)
break;
}
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
return cpufreq_cdev->max_level - i - 1;
}
static u32 cpu_freq_to_power(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev,
u32 freq)
{
PM: EM: convert power field to micro-Watts precision and align drivers The milli-Watts precision causes rounding errors while calculating efficiency cost for each OPP. This is especially visible in the 'simple' Energy Model (EM), where the power for each OPP is provided from OPP framework. This can cause some OPPs to be marked inefficient, while using micro-Watts precision that might not happen. Update all EM users which access 'power' field and assume the value is in milli-Watts. Solve also an issue with potential overflow in calculation of energy estimation on 32bit machine. It's needed now since the power value (thus the 'cost' as well) are higher. Example calculation which shows the rounding error and impact: power = 'dyn-power-coeff' * volt_mV * volt_mV * freq_MHz power_a_uW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^6 = 18000 power_a_mW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^9 = 18 power_b_uW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^6 = 21961 power_b_mW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^9 = 21 max_freq = 2000MHz cost_a_mW = 18 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72 cost_a_uW = 18000 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72000 cost_b_mW = 21 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 70 // <- artificially better cost_b_uW = 21961 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 73203 The 'cost_b_mW' (which is based on old milli-Watts) is misleadingly better that the 'cost_b_uW' (this patch uses micro-Watts) and such would have impact on the 'inefficient OPPs' information in the Cpufreq framework. This patch set removes the rounding issue. Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2022-07-07 15:15:52 +08:00
unsigned long power_mw;
int i;
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
for (i = cpufreq_cdev->max_level - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
if (freq > cpufreq_cdev->em->table[i].frequency)
break;
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
}
PM: EM: convert power field to micro-Watts precision and align drivers The milli-Watts precision causes rounding errors while calculating efficiency cost for each OPP. This is especially visible in the 'simple' Energy Model (EM), where the power for each OPP is provided from OPP framework. This can cause some OPPs to be marked inefficient, while using micro-Watts precision that might not happen. Update all EM users which access 'power' field and assume the value is in milli-Watts. Solve also an issue with potential overflow in calculation of energy estimation on 32bit machine. It's needed now since the power value (thus the 'cost' as well) are higher. Example calculation which shows the rounding error and impact: power = 'dyn-power-coeff' * volt_mV * volt_mV * freq_MHz power_a_uW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^6 = 18000 power_a_mW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^9 = 18 power_b_uW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^6 = 21961 power_b_mW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^9 = 21 max_freq = 2000MHz cost_a_mW = 18 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72 cost_a_uW = 18000 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72000 cost_b_mW = 21 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 70 // <- artificially better cost_b_uW = 21961 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 73203 The 'cost_b_mW' (which is based on old milli-Watts) is misleadingly better that the 'cost_b_uW' (this patch uses micro-Watts) and such would have impact on the 'inefficient OPPs' information in the Cpufreq framework. This patch set removes the rounding issue. Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2022-07-07 15:15:52 +08:00
power_mw = cpufreq_cdev->em->table[i + 1].power;
power_mw /= MICROWATT_PER_MILLIWATT;
return power_mw;
}
static u32 cpu_power_to_freq(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev,
u32 power)
{
PM: EM: convert power field to micro-Watts precision and align drivers The milli-Watts precision causes rounding errors while calculating efficiency cost for each OPP. This is especially visible in the 'simple' Energy Model (EM), where the power for each OPP is provided from OPP framework. This can cause some OPPs to be marked inefficient, while using micro-Watts precision that might not happen. Update all EM users which access 'power' field and assume the value is in milli-Watts. Solve also an issue with potential overflow in calculation of energy estimation on 32bit machine. It's needed now since the power value (thus the 'cost' as well) are higher. Example calculation which shows the rounding error and impact: power = 'dyn-power-coeff' * volt_mV * volt_mV * freq_MHz power_a_uW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^6 = 18000 power_a_mW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^9 = 18 power_b_uW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^6 = 21961 power_b_mW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^9 = 21 max_freq = 2000MHz cost_a_mW = 18 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72 cost_a_uW = 18000 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72000 cost_b_mW = 21 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 70 // <- artificially better cost_b_uW = 21961 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 73203 The 'cost_b_mW' (which is based on old milli-Watts) is misleadingly better that the 'cost_b_uW' (this patch uses micro-Watts) and such would have impact on the 'inefficient OPPs' information in the Cpufreq framework. This patch set removes the rounding issue. Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2022-07-07 15:15:52 +08:00
unsigned long em_power_mw;
int i;
thermal/drivers/cpufreq_cooling: Fix slab OOB issue Slab OOB issue is scanned by KASAN in cpu_power_to_freq(). If power is limited below the power of OPP0 in EM table, it will cause slab out-of-bound issue with negative array index. Return the lowest frequency if limited power cannot found a suitable OPP in EM table to fix this issue. Backtrace: [<ffffffd02d2a37f0>] die+0x104/0x5ac [<ffffffd02d2a5630>] bug_handler+0x64/0xd0 [<ffffffd02d288ce4>] brk_handler+0x160/0x258 [<ffffffd02d281e5c>] do_debug_exception+0x248/0x3f0 [<ffffffd02d284488>] el1_dbg+0x14/0xbc [<ffffffd02d75d1d4>] __kasan_report+0x1dc/0x1e0 [<ffffffd02d75c2e0>] kasan_report+0x10/0x20 [<ffffffd02d75def8>] __asan_report_load8_noabort+0x18/0x28 [<ffffffd02e6fce5c>] cpufreq_power2state+0x180/0x43c [<ffffffd02e6ead80>] power_actor_set_power+0x114/0x1d4 [<ffffffd02e6fac24>] allocate_power+0xaec/0xde0 [<ffffffd02e6f9f80>] power_allocator_throttle+0x3ec/0x5a4 [<ffffffd02e6ea888>] handle_thermal_trip+0x160/0x294 [<ffffffd02e6edd08>] thermal_zone_device_check+0xe4/0x154 [<ffffffd02d351cb4>] process_one_work+0x5e4/0xe28 [<ffffffd02d352f44>] worker_thread+0xa4c/0xfac [<ffffffd02d360124>] kthread+0x33c/0x358 [<ffffffd02d289940>] ret_from_fork+0xc/0x18 Fixes: 371a3bc79c11b ("thermal/drivers/cpufreq_cooling: Fix wrong frequency converted from power") Signed-off-by: brian-sy yang <brian-sy.yang@mediatek.com> Signed-off-by: Michael Kao <michael.kao@mediatek.com> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #v5.7 Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201229050831.19493-1-michael.kao@mediatek.com
2020-12-29 13:08:31 +08:00
for (i = cpufreq_cdev->max_level; i > 0; i--) {
PM: EM: convert power field to micro-Watts precision and align drivers The milli-Watts precision causes rounding errors while calculating efficiency cost for each OPP. This is especially visible in the 'simple' Energy Model (EM), where the power for each OPP is provided from OPP framework. This can cause some OPPs to be marked inefficient, while using micro-Watts precision that might not happen. Update all EM users which access 'power' field and assume the value is in milli-Watts. Solve also an issue with potential overflow in calculation of energy estimation on 32bit machine. It's needed now since the power value (thus the 'cost' as well) are higher. Example calculation which shows the rounding error and impact: power = 'dyn-power-coeff' * volt_mV * volt_mV * freq_MHz power_a_uW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^6 = 18000 power_a_mW = (100 * 600mW * 600mW * 500MHz) / 10^9 = 18 power_b_uW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^6 = 21961 power_b_mW = (100 * 605mW * 605mW * 600MHz) / 10^9 = 21 max_freq = 2000MHz cost_a_mW = 18 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72 cost_a_uW = 18000 * 2000MHz/500MHz = 72000 cost_b_mW = 21 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 70 // <- artificially better cost_b_uW = 21961 * 2000MHz/600MHz = 73203 The 'cost_b_mW' (which is based on old milli-Watts) is misleadingly better that the 'cost_b_uW' (this patch uses micro-Watts) and such would have impact on the 'inefficient OPPs' information in the Cpufreq framework. This patch set removes the rounding issue. Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2022-07-07 15:15:52 +08:00
/* Convert EM power to milli-Watts to make safe comparison */
em_power_mw = cpufreq_cdev->em->table[i].power;
em_power_mw /= MICROWATT_PER_MILLIWATT;
if (power >= em_power_mw)
break;
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
}
return cpufreq_cdev->em->table[i].frequency;
}
/**
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
* get_load() - get load for a cpu
* @cpufreq_cdev: struct cpufreq_cooling_device for the cpu
* @cpu: cpu number
* @cpu_idx: index of the cpu in time_in_idle array
*
* Return: The average load of cpu @cpu in percentage since this
* function was last called.
*/
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
static u32 get_load(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev, int cpu,
int cpu_idx)
{
unsigned long util = sched_cpu_util(cpu);
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
return (util * 100) / arch_scale_cpu_capacity(cpu);
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
}
#else /* !CONFIG_SMP */
static u32 get_load(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev, int cpu,
int cpu_idx)
{
u32 load;
u64 now, now_idle, delta_time, delta_idle;
struct time_in_idle *idle_time = &cpufreq_cdev->idle_time[cpu_idx];
now_idle = get_cpu_idle_time(cpu, &now, 0);
delta_idle = now_idle - idle_time->time;
delta_time = now - idle_time->timestamp;
if (delta_time <= delta_idle)
load = 0;
else
load = div64_u64(100 * (delta_time - delta_idle), delta_time);
idle_time->time = now_idle;
idle_time->timestamp = now;
return load;
}
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
/**
* get_dynamic_power() - calculate the dynamic power
* @cpufreq_cdev: &cpufreq_cooling_device for this cdev
* @freq: current frequency
*
* Return: the dynamic power consumed by the cpus described by
* @cpufreq_cdev.
*/
static u32 get_dynamic_power(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev,
unsigned long freq)
{
u32 raw_cpu_power;
raw_cpu_power = cpu_freq_to_power(cpufreq_cdev, freq);
return (raw_cpu_power * cpufreq_cdev->last_load) / 100;
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
}
/**
* cpufreq_get_requested_power() - get the current power
* @cdev: &thermal_cooling_device pointer
* @power: pointer in which to store the resulting power
*
* Calculate the current power consumption of the cpus in milliwatts
* and store it in @power. This function should actually calculate
* the requested power, but it's hard to get the frequency that
* cpufreq would have assigned if there were no thermal limits.
* Instead, we calculate the current power on the assumption that the
* immediate future will look like the immediate past.
*
* We use the current frequency and the average load since this
* function was last called. In reality, there could have been
* multiple opps since this function was last called and that affects
* the load calculation. While it's not perfectly accurate, this
* simplification is good enough and works. REVISIT this, as more
* complex code may be needed if experiments show that it's not
* accurate enough.
*
* Return: 0 on success, this function doesn't fail.
*/
static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
u32 *power)
{
unsigned long freq;
int i = 0, cpu;
u32 total_load = 0;
struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev = cdev->devdata;
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cdev->policy;
freq = cpufreq_quick_get(policy->cpu);
for_each_cpu(cpu, policy->related_cpus) {
u32 load;
if (cpu_online(cpu))
load = get_load(cpufreq_cdev, cpu, i);
else
load = 0;
total_load += load;
}
cpufreq_cdev->last_load = total_load;
*power = get_dynamic_power(cpufreq_cdev, freq);
trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_simple(policy->cpu, *power);
return 0;
}
/**
* cpufreq_state2power() - convert a cpu cdev state to power consumed
* @cdev: &thermal_cooling_device pointer
* @state: cooling device state to be converted
* @power: pointer in which to store the resulting power
*
* Convert cooling device state @state into power consumption in
* milliwatts assuming 100% load. Store the calculated power in
* @power.
*
* Return: 0 on success, -EINVAL if the cooling device state is bigger
* than maximum allowed.
*/
static int cpufreq_state2power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
unsigned long state, u32 *power)
{
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
unsigned int freq, num_cpus, idx;
struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev = cdev->devdata;
/* Request state should be less than max_level */
if (state > cpufreq_cdev->max_level)
return -EINVAL;
num_cpus = cpumask_weight(cpufreq_cdev->policy->cpus);
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
idx = cpufreq_cdev->max_level - state;
freq = cpufreq_cdev->em->table[idx].frequency;
*power = cpu_freq_to_power(cpufreq_cdev, freq) * num_cpus;
return 0;
}
/**
* cpufreq_power2state() - convert power to a cooling device state
* @cdev: &thermal_cooling_device pointer
* @power: power in milliwatts to be converted
* @state: pointer in which to store the resulting state
*
* Calculate a cooling device state for the cpus described by @cdev
* that would allow them to consume at most @power mW and store it in
* @state. Note that this calculation depends on external factors
* such as the CPUs load. Calling this function with the same power
* as input can yield different cooling device states depending on those
* external factors.
*
* Return: 0 on success, this function doesn't fail.
*/
static int cpufreq_power2state(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
u32 power, unsigned long *state)
{
unsigned int target_freq;
u32 last_load, normalised_power;
struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev = cdev->devdata;
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cdev->policy;
last_load = cpufreq_cdev->last_load ?: 1;
normalised_power = (power * 100) / last_load;
target_freq = cpu_power_to_freq(cpufreq_cdev, normalised_power);
*state = get_level(cpufreq_cdev, target_freq);
trace_thermal_power_cpu_limit(policy->related_cpus, target_freq, *state,
power);
return 0;
}
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
static inline bool em_is_sane(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev,
struct em_perf_domain *em) {
struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
unsigned int nr_levels;
if (!em || em_is_artificial(em))
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
return false;
policy = cpufreq_cdev->policy;
if (!cpumask_equal(policy->related_cpus, em_span_cpus(em))) {
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
pr_err("The span of pd %*pbl is misaligned with cpufreq policy %*pbl\n",
cpumask_pr_args(em_span_cpus(em)),
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
cpumask_pr_args(policy->related_cpus));
return false;
}
nr_levels = cpufreq_cdev->max_level + 1;
if (em_pd_nr_perf_states(em) != nr_levels) {
pr_err("The number of performance states in pd %*pbl (%u) doesn't match the number of cooling levels (%u)\n",
cpumask_pr_args(em_span_cpus(em)),
em_pd_nr_perf_states(em), nr_levels);
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
return false;
}
return true;
}
#endif /* CONFIG_THERMAL_GOV_POWER_ALLOCATOR */
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
static inline int allocate_idle_time(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev)
{
return 0;
}
static inline void free_idle_time(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev)
{
}
#else
static int allocate_idle_time(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev)
{
unsigned int num_cpus = cpumask_weight(cpufreq_cdev->policy->related_cpus);
cpufreq_cdev->idle_time = kcalloc(num_cpus,
sizeof(*cpufreq_cdev->idle_time),
GFP_KERNEL);
if (!cpufreq_cdev->idle_time)
return -ENOMEM;
return 0;
}
static void free_idle_time(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev)
{
kfree(cpufreq_cdev->idle_time);
cpufreq_cdev->idle_time = NULL;
}
#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
static unsigned int get_state_freq(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev,
unsigned long state)
{
struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
unsigned long idx;
#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL_GOV_POWER_ALLOCATOR
/* Use the Energy Model table if available */
if (cpufreq_cdev->em) {
idx = cpufreq_cdev->max_level - state;
return cpufreq_cdev->em->table[idx].frequency;
}
#endif
/* Otherwise, fallback on the CPUFreq table */
policy = cpufreq_cdev->policy;
if (policy->freq_table_sorted == CPUFREQ_TABLE_SORTED_ASCENDING)
idx = cpufreq_cdev->max_level - state;
else
idx = state;
return policy->freq_table[idx].frequency;
}
/* cpufreq cooling device callback functions are defined below */
/**
* cpufreq_get_max_state - callback function to get the max cooling state.
* @cdev: thermal cooling device pointer.
* @state: fill this variable with the max cooling state.
*
* Callback for the thermal cooling device to return the cpufreq
* max cooling state.
*
* Return: 0 on success, this function doesn't fail.
*/
static int cpufreq_get_max_state(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
unsigned long *state)
{
struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev = cdev->devdata;
*state = cpufreq_cdev->max_level;
return 0;
}
/**
* cpufreq_get_cur_state - callback function to get the current cooling state.
* @cdev: thermal cooling device pointer.
* @state: fill this variable with the current cooling state.
*
* Callback for the thermal cooling device to return the cpufreq
* current cooling state.
*
* Return: 0 on success, this function doesn't fail.
*/
static int cpufreq_get_cur_state(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
unsigned long *state)
{
struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev = cdev->devdata;
*state = cpufreq_cdev->cpufreq_state;
return 0;
}
/**
* cpufreq_set_cur_state - callback function to set the current cooling state.
* @cdev: thermal cooling device pointer.
* @state: set this variable to the current cooling state.
*
* Callback for the thermal cooling device to change the cpufreq
* current cooling state.
*
* Return: 0 on success, an error code otherwise.
*/
static int cpufreq_set_cur_state(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
unsigned long state)
{
struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev = cdev->devdata;
struct cpumask *cpus;
unsigned int frequency;
int ret;
/* Request state should be less than max_level */
if (state > cpufreq_cdev->max_level)
return -EINVAL;
/* Check if the old cooling action is same as new cooling action */
if (cpufreq_cdev->cpufreq_state == state)
return 0;
frequency = get_state_freq(cpufreq_cdev, state);
ret = freq_qos_update_request(&cpufreq_cdev->qos_req, frequency);
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: freq_qos_update_request() returns < 0 on error freq_qos_update_request() returns 1 if the effective constraint value has changed, 0 if the effective constraint value has not changed, or a negative error code on failures. The frequency constraints for CPUs can be set by different parts of the kernel. If the maximum frequency constraint set by other parts of the kernel are set at a lower value than the one corresponding to cooling state 0, then we will never be able to cool down the system as freq_qos_update_request() will keep on returning 0 and we will skip updating cpufreq_state and thermal pressure. Fix that by doing the updates even in the case where freq_qos_update_request() returns 0, as we have effectively set the constraint to a new value even if the consolidated value of the actual constraint is unchanged because of external factors. Cc: v5.7+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.7+ Reported-by: Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@linaro.org> Fixes: f12e4f66ab6a ("thermal/cpu-cooling: Update thermal pressure in case of a maximum frequency capping") Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Tested-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Tested-by: Thara Gopinath<thara.gopinath@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/b2b7e84944937390256669df5a48ce5abba0c1ef.1613540713.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2021-02-17 13:48:58 +08:00
if (ret >= 0) {
cpufreq_cdev->cpufreq_state = state;
cpus = cpufreq_cdev->policy->related_cpus;
arch_update_thermal_pressure(cpus, frequency);
- Convert tsens configuration DT binding to yaml (Rajeshwari) - Add interrupt support on the rcar sensor (Niklas Söderlund) - Add a new Spreadtrum thermal driver (Baolin Wang) - Add thermal binding for the fsl scu board, a new API to retrieve the sensor id bound to the thermal zone and i.MX system controller sensor (Anson Huang)) - Remove warning log when a deferred probe is requested on Exynos (Marek Szyprowski) - Add the thermal monitoring unit support for imx8mm with its DT bindings (Anson Huang) - Rephrase the Kconfig text for clarity (Linus Walleij) - Use the gpio descriptor for the ti-soc-thermal (Linus Walleij) - Align msg structure to 4 bytes for i.MX SC, fix the Kconfig dependency, add the __may_be unused annotation for PM functions and the COMPILE_TEST option for imx8mm (Anson Huang) - Fix a dependency on regmap in Kconfig for qoriq (Yuantian Tang) - Add DT binding and support for the rcar gen3 r8a77961 and improve the error path on the rcar init function (Niklas Söderlund) - Cleanup and improvements for the tsens Qcom sensor (Amit Kucheria) - Improve code by removing lock and caching values in the rcar thermal sensor (Niklas Söderlund) - Cleanup in the qoriq drivers and add a call to imx_thermal_unregister_legacy_cooling in the removal function (Anson Huang) - Remove redundant 'maxItems' in tsens and sprd DT bindings (Rob Herring) - Change the thermal DT bindings by making the cooling-maps optional (Yuantian Tang) - Add Tiger Lake support (Sumeet Pawnikar) - Use scnprintf() for avoiding potential buffer overflow (Takashi Iwai) - Make pkg_temp_lock a raw_spinlock_t(Clark Williams) - Fix incorrect data types by changing them to signed on i.MX SC (Anson Huang) - Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member (Gustavo A. R. Silva) - Add support for i.MX8MP in the driver and in the DT bindings (Anson Huang) - Fix return value of the cpufreq_set_cur_state() function (Willy Wolff) - Remove abusing and scary WARN_ON in the cpufreq cooling device (Daniel Lezcano) - Fix build warning of incorrect argument type reported by sparse on imx8mm (Anson Huang) - Fix stub for the devfreq cooling device (Martin Blumenstingl) - Fix cpu idle cooling documentation (Sergey Vidishev) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCAAdFiEEGn3N4YVz0WNVyHskqDIjiipP6E8FAl6MXkEACgkQqDIjiipP 6E+BIggAh52YBU8D8GthsvCPTgka95+wAIaZtx4Y7UnhvshHhM2w+m97TQOXK373 95mwO9mwQuAoksSmLo7pBQYJ7HItQ26Yoq9akpOL6EiT+BEWiqoHJgl+afVVtoKa n67d3Pa6coup1+PQNIA8kpTIOmUQTP8THtwpZ3HlChWsg22NTd0QUGpGJ1TtBD/q KqMdQjxahFJ4RTYsnECWBkw3EMkczMNMgdrXEvm4rMkcaJzv9g2ZPqerOShK/RzP 8sejWczt6jaRwu4hLpd/lLikTSHZoXMFJ8ylAiQXFELCPAQIrMS/ae+dTGJ4qP7x hkjsewPbeA1Z+al/IBVHiCtOzKkICQ== =XDYl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Merge tag 'thermal-v5.7-rc1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/thermal/linux Pull thermal updates from Daniel Lezcano: - Convert tsens configuration DT binding to yaml (Rajeshwari) - Add interrupt support on the rcar sensor (Niklas Söderlund) - Add a new Spreadtrum thermal driver (Baolin Wang) - Add thermal binding for the fsl scu board, a new API to retrieve the sensor id bound to the thermal zone and i.MX system controller sensor (Anson Huang)) - Remove warning log when a deferred probe is requested on Exynos (Marek Szyprowski) - Add the thermal monitoring unit support for imx8mm with its DT bindings (Anson Huang) - Rephrase the Kconfig text for clarity (Linus Walleij) - Use the gpio descriptor for the ti-soc-thermal (Linus Walleij) - Align msg structure to 4 bytes for i.MX SC, fix the Kconfig dependency, add the __may_be unused annotation for PM functions and the COMPILE_TEST option for imx8mm (Anson Huang) - Fix a dependency on regmap in Kconfig for qoriq (Yuantian Tang) - Add DT binding and support for the rcar gen3 r8a77961 and improve the error path on the rcar init function (Niklas Söderlund) - Cleanup and improvements for the tsens Qcom sensor (Amit Kucheria) - Improve code by removing lock and caching values in the rcar thermal sensor (Niklas Söderlund) - Cleanup in the qoriq drivers and add a call to imx_thermal_unregister_legacy_cooling in the removal function (Anson Huang) - Remove redundant 'maxItems' in tsens and sprd DT bindings (Rob Herring) - Change the thermal DT bindings by making the cooling-maps optional (Yuantian Tang) - Add Tiger Lake support (Sumeet Pawnikar) - Use scnprintf() for avoiding potential buffer overflow (Takashi Iwai) - Make pkg_temp_lock a raw_spinlock_t(Clark Williams) - Fix incorrect data types by changing them to signed on i.MX SC (Anson Huang) - Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member (Gustavo A. R. Silva) - Add support for i.MX8MP in the driver and in the DT bindings (Anson Huang) - Fix return value of the cpufreq_set_cur_state() function (Willy Wolff) - Remove abusing and scary WARN_ON in the cpufreq cooling device (Daniel Lezcano) - Fix build warning of incorrect argument type reported by sparse on imx8mm (Anson Huang) - Fix stub for the devfreq cooling device (Martin Blumenstingl) - Fix cpu idle cooling documentation (Sergey Vidishev) * tag 'thermal-v5.7-rc1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/thermal/linux: (52 commits) Documentation: cpu-idle-cooling: Fix diagram for 33% duty cycle thermal: devfreq_cooling: inline all stubs for CONFIG_DEVFREQ_THERMAL=n thermal: imx8mm: Fix build warning of incorrect argument type thermal/drivers/cpufreq_cooling: Remove abusing WARN_ON thermal/drivers/cpufreq_cooling: Fix return of cpufreq_set_cur_state thermal: imx8mm: Add i.MX8MP support dt-bindings: thermal: imx8mm-thermal: Add support for i.MX8MP thermal: qcom: tsens.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member thermal: imx_sc_thermal: Fix incorrect data type thermal: int340x_thermal: Use scnprintf() for avoiding potential buffer overflow thermal: int340x: processor_thermal: Add Tiger Lake support thermal/x86_pkg_temp: Make pkg_temp_lock a raw_spinlock_t dt-bindings: thermal: make cooling-maps property optional dt-bindings: thermal: qcom-tsens: Remove redundant 'maxItems' dt-bindings: thermal: sprd: Remove redundant 'maxItems' thermal: imx: Calling imx_thermal_unregister_legacy_cooling() in .remove thermal: qoriq: Sort includes alphabetically thermal: qoriq: Use devm_add_action_or_reset() to handle all cleanups thermal: rcar_thermal: Remove lock in rcar_thermal_get_current_temp() thermal: rcar_thermal: Do not store ctemp in rcar_thermal_priv ...
2020-04-08 11:00:16 +08:00
ret = 0;
}
return ret;
}
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
/**
* __cpufreq_cooling_register - helper function to create cpufreq cooling device
* @np: a valid struct device_node to the cooling device device tree node
* @policy: cpufreq policy
* Normally this should be same as cpufreq policy->related_cpus.
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
* @em: Energy Model of the cpufreq policy
*
* This interface function registers the cpufreq cooling device with the name
* "cpufreq-%s". This API can support multiple instances of cpufreq
* cooling devices. It also gives the opportunity to link the cooling device
* with a device tree node, in order to bind it via the thermal DT code.
*
* Return: a valid struct thermal_cooling_device pointer on success,
* on failure, it returns a corresponding ERR_PTR().
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
*/
static struct thermal_cooling_device *
__cpufreq_cooling_register(struct device_node *np,
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
struct em_perf_domain *em)
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
{
struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev;
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
unsigned int i;
struct device *dev;
int ret;
struct thermal_cooling_device_ops *cooling_ops;
char *name;
dev = get_cpu_device(policy->cpu);
if (unlikely(!dev)) {
pr_warn("No cpu device for cpu %d\n", policy->cpu);
return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
}
if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(policy)) {
pr_err("%s: cpufreq policy isn't valid: %p\n", __func__, policy);
return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
}
i = cpufreq_table_count_valid_entries(policy);
if (!i) {
pr_debug("%s: CPUFreq table not found or has no valid entries\n",
__func__);
return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
}
cpufreq_cdev = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpufreq_cdev), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!cpufreq_cdev)
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
cpufreq_cdev->policy = policy;
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
ret = allocate_idle_time(cpufreq_cdev);
if (ret) {
cdev = ERR_PTR(ret);
goto free_cdev;
}
/* max_level is an index, not a counter */
cpufreq_cdev->max_level = i - 1;
cooling_ops = &cpufreq_cdev->cooling_ops;
cooling_ops->get_max_state = cpufreq_get_max_state;
cooling_ops->get_cur_state = cpufreq_get_cur_state;
cooling_ops->set_cur_state = cpufreq_set_cur_state;
#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL_GOV_POWER_ALLOCATOR
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
if (em_is_sane(cpufreq_cdev, em)) {
cpufreq_cdev->em = em;
cooling_ops->get_requested_power = cpufreq_get_requested_power;
cooling_ops->state2power = cpufreq_state2power;
cooling_ops->power2state = cpufreq_power2state;
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
} else
#endif
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
if (policy->freq_table_sorted == CPUFREQ_TABLE_UNSORTED) {
pr_err("%s: unsorted frequency tables are not supported\n",
__func__);
cdev = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
goto free_idle_time;
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
}
cpufreq: Use per-policy frequency QoS Replace the CPU device PM QoS used for the management of min and max frequency constraints in cpufreq (and its users) with per-policy frequency QoS to avoid problems with cpufreq policies covering more then one CPU. Namely, a cpufreq driver is registered with the subsys interface which calls cpufreq_add_dev() for each CPU, starting from CPU0, so currently the PM QoS notifiers are added to the first CPU in the policy (i.e. CPU0 in the majority of cases). In turn, when the cpufreq driver is unregistered, the subsys interface doing that calls cpufreq_remove_dev() for each CPU, starting from CPU0, and the PM QoS notifiers are only removed when cpufreq_remove_dev() is called for the last CPU in the policy, say CPUx, which as a rule is not CPU0 if the policy covers more than one CPU. Then, the PM QoS notifiers cannot be removed, because CPUx does not have them, and they are still there in the device PM QoS notifiers list of CPU0, which prevents new PM QoS notifiers from being registered for CPU0 on the next attempt to register the cpufreq driver. The same issue occurs when the first CPU in the policy goes offline before unregistering the driver. After this change it does not matter which CPU is the policy CPU at the driver registration time and whether or not it is online all the time, because the frequency QoS is per policy and not per CPU. Fixes: 67d874c3b2c6 ("cpufreq: Register notifiers with the PM QoS framework") Reported-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> Tested-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> Reported-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Tested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Diagnosed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/5ad2624194baa2f53acc1f1e627eb7684c577a19.1562210705.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org/T/#md2d89e95906b8c91c15f582146173dce2e86e99f Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20191017094612.6tbkwoq4harsjcqv@vireshk-i7/T/#m30d48cc23b9a80467fbaa16e30f90b3828a5a29b Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
2019-10-16 18:47:06 +08:00
ret = freq_qos_add_request(&policy->constraints,
&cpufreq_cdev->qos_req, FREQ_QOS_MAX,
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
get_state_freq(cpufreq_cdev, 0));
if (ret < 0) {
pr_err("%s: Failed to add freq constraint (%d)\n", __func__,
ret);
cdev = ERR_PTR(ret);
goto free_idle_time;
}
cdev = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "cpufreq-%s", dev_name(dev));
if (!name)
goto remove_qos_req;
cdev = thermal_of_cooling_device_register(np, name, cpufreq_cdev,
cooling_ops);
kfree(name);
if (IS_ERR(cdev))
goto remove_qos_req;
return cdev;
remove_qos_req:
cpufreq: Use per-policy frequency QoS Replace the CPU device PM QoS used for the management of min and max frequency constraints in cpufreq (and its users) with per-policy frequency QoS to avoid problems with cpufreq policies covering more then one CPU. Namely, a cpufreq driver is registered with the subsys interface which calls cpufreq_add_dev() for each CPU, starting from CPU0, so currently the PM QoS notifiers are added to the first CPU in the policy (i.e. CPU0 in the majority of cases). In turn, when the cpufreq driver is unregistered, the subsys interface doing that calls cpufreq_remove_dev() for each CPU, starting from CPU0, and the PM QoS notifiers are only removed when cpufreq_remove_dev() is called for the last CPU in the policy, say CPUx, which as a rule is not CPU0 if the policy covers more than one CPU. Then, the PM QoS notifiers cannot be removed, because CPUx does not have them, and they are still there in the device PM QoS notifiers list of CPU0, which prevents new PM QoS notifiers from being registered for CPU0 on the next attempt to register the cpufreq driver. The same issue occurs when the first CPU in the policy goes offline before unregistering the driver. After this change it does not matter which CPU is the policy CPU at the driver registration time and whether or not it is online all the time, because the frequency QoS is per policy and not per CPU. Fixes: 67d874c3b2c6 ("cpufreq: Register notifiers with the PM QoS framework") Reported-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> Tested-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> Reported-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Tested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Diagnosed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/5ad2624194baa2f53acc1f1e627eb7684c577a19.1562210705.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org/T/#md2d89e95906b8c91c15f582146173dce2e86e99f Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20191017094612.6tbkwoq4harsjcqv@vireshk-i7/T/#m30d48cc23b9a80467fbaa16e30f90b3828a5a29b Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
2019-10-16 18:47:06 +08:00
freq_qos_remove_request(&cpufreq_cdev->qos_req);
free_idle_time:
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
free_idle_time(cpufreq_cdev);
free_cdev:
kfree(cpufreq_cdev);
return cdev;
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
}
/**
* cpufreq_cooling_register - function to create cpufreq cooling device.
* @policy: cpufreq policy
*
* This interface function registers the cpufreq cooling device with the name
* "cpufreq-%s". This API can support multiple instances of cpufreq cooling
* devices.
*
* Return: a valid struct thermal_cooling_device pointer on success,
* on failure, it returns a corresponding ERR_PTR().
*/
struct thermal_cooling_device *
cpufreq_cooling_register(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
return __cpufreq_cooling_register(NULL, policy, NULL);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_cooling_register);
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
/**
* of_cpufreq_cooling_register - function to create cpufreq cooling device.
* @policy: cpufreq policy
*
* This interface function registers the cpufreq cooling device with the name
* "cpufreq-%s". This API can support multiple instances of cpufreq cooling
* devices. Using this API, the cpufreq cooling device will be linked to the
* device tree node provided.
*
* Using this function, the cooling device will implement the power
* extensions by using the Energy Model (if present). The cpus must have
* registered their OPPs using the OPP library.
*
* Return: a valid struct thermal_cooling_device pointer on success,
* and NULL on failure.
*/
struct thermal_cooling_device *
of_cpufreq_cooling_register(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
struct device_node *np = of_get_cpu_node(policy->cpu, NULL);
struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev = NULL;
if (!np) {
pr_err("cpufreq_cooling: OF node not available for cpu%d\n",
policy->cpu);
return NULL;
}
if (of_find_property(np, "#cooling-cells", NULL)) {
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
struct em_perf_domain *em = em_cpu_get(policy->cpu);
thermal: cpu_cooling: Migrate to using the EM framework The newly introduced Energy Model framework manages power cost tables in a generic way. Moreover, it supports several types of models since the tables can come from DT or firmware (through SCMI) for example. On the other hand, the cpu_cooling subsystem manages its own power cost tables using only DT data. In order to avoid the duplication of data in the kernel, and in order to enable IPA with EMs coming from more than just DT, remove the private tables from cpu_cooling.c and migrate it to using the centralized EM framework. Doing so should have no visible functional impact for existing users of IPA since: - recent extenstions to the the PM_OPP infrastructure enable the registration of EMs in PM_EM using the DT property used by IPA; - the existing upstream cpufreq drivers marked with the 'CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV' flag all use the aforementioned PM_OPP infrastructure, which means they all support PM_EM. The only two exceptions are qoriq-cpufreq which doesn't in fact use an EM and scmi-cpufreq which doesn't use DT for power costs. For existing users of cpu_cooling, PM_EM tables will contain the exact same power values that IPA used to compute on its own until now. The only new dependency for them is to compile in CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL. The case where the thermal subsystem is used without an Energy Model (cpufreq_cooling_ops) is handled by looking directly at CPUFreq's frequency table which is already a dependency for cpu_cooling.c anyway. Since the thermal framework expects the cooling states in a particular order, bail out whenever the CPUFreq table is unsorted, since that is fairly uncommon in general, and there are currently no users of cpu_cooling for this use-case. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191030151451.7961-5-qperret@google.com
2019-10-30 23:14:51 +08:00
cdev = __cpufreq_cooling_register(np, policy, em);
if (IS_ERR(cdev)) {
pr_err("cpufreq_cooling: cpu%d failed to register as cooling device: %ld\n",
policy->cpu, PTR_ERR(cdev));
cdev = NULL;
}
}
of_node_put(np);
return cdev;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_cpufreq_cooling_register);
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
/**
* cpufreq_cooling_unregister - function to remove cpufreq cooling device.
* @cdev: thermal cooling device pointer.
*
* This interface function unregisters the "cpufreq-%x" cooling device.
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
*/
void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev)
{
struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_cdev;
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
if (!cdev)
return;
cpufreq_cdev = cdev->devdata;
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
thermal_cooling_device_unregister(cdev);
cpufreq: Use per-policy frequency QoS Replace the CPU device PM QoS used for the management of min and max frequency constraints in cpufreq (and its users) with per-policy frequency QoS to avoid problems with cpufreq policies covering more then one CPU. Namely, a cpufreq driver is registered with the subsys interface which calls cpufreq_add_dev() for each CPU, starting from CPU0, so currently the PM QoS notifiers are added to the first CPU in the policy (i.e. CPU0 in the majority of cases). In turn, when the cpufreq driver is unregistered, the subsys interface doing that calls cpufreq_remove_dev() for each CPU, starting from CPU0, and the PM QoS notifiers are only removed when cpufreq_remove_dev() is called for the last CPU in the policy, say CPUx, which as a rule is not CPU0 if the policy covers more than one CPU. Then, the PM QoS notifiers cannot be removed, because CPUx does not have them, and they are still there in the device PM QoS notifiers list of CPU0, which prevents new PM QoS notifiers from being registered for CPU0 on the next attempt to register the cpufreq driver. The same issue occurs when the first CPU in the policy goes offline before unregistering the driver. After this change it does not matter which CPU is the policy CPU at the driver registration time and whether or not it is online all the time, because the frequency QoS is per policy and not per CPU. Fixes: 67d874c3b2c6 ("cpufreq: Register notifiers with the PM QoS framework") Reported-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> Tested-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> Reported-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Tested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> Diagnosed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/5ad2624194baa2f53acc1f1e627eb7684c577a19.1562210705.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org/T/#md2d89e95906b8c91c15f582146173dce2e86e99f Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20191017094612.6tbkwoq4harsjcqv@vireshk-i7/T/#m30d48cc23b9a80467fbaa16e30f90b3828a5a29b Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
2019-10-16 18:47:06 +08:00
freq_qos_remove_request(&cpufreq_cdev->qos_req);
thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Reuse sched_cpu_util() for SMP platforms Several parts of the kernel are already using the effective CPU utilization (as seen by the scheduler) to get the current load on the CPU, do the same here instead of depending on the idle time of the CPU, which isn't that accurate comparatively. This is also the right thing to do as it makes the cpufreq governor (schedutil) align better with the cpufreq_cooling driver, as the power requested by cpufreq_cooling governor will exactly match the next frequency requested by the schedutil governor since they are both using the same metric to calculate load. This was tested on ARM Hikey6220 platform with hackbench, sysbench and schbench. None of them showed any regression or significant improvements. Schbench is the most important ones out of these as it creates the scenario where the utilization numbers provide a better estimate of the future. Scenario 1: The CPUs were mostly idle in the previous polling window of the IPA governor as the tasks were sleeping and here are the details from traces (load is in %): Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=203 load={{0x35,0x1,0x0,0x31,0x0,0x0,0x64,0x0}} dynamic_power=1339 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=600 load={{0x60,0x46,0x45,0x45,0x48,0x3b,0x61,0x44}} dynamic_power=3960 Here, the "Old" line gives the load and requested_power (dynamic_power here) numbers calculated using the idle time based implementation, while "New" is based on the CPU utilization from scheduler. As can be clearly seen, the load and requested_power numbers are simply incorrect in the idle time based approach and the numbers collected from CPU's utilization are much closer to the reality. Scenario 2: The CPUs were busy in the previous polling window of the IPA governor: Old: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=800 load={{0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64,0x64}} dynamic_power=5280 New: thermal_power_cpu_get_power: cpus=00000000,000000ff freq=1200000 total_load=708 load={{0x4d,0x5c,0x5c,0x5b,0x5c,0x5c,0x51,0x5b}} dynamic_power=4672 As can be seen, the idle time based load is 100% for all the CPUs as it took only the last window into account, but in reality the CPUs aren't that loaded as shown by the utilization numbers. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/9c255c83d78d58451abc06848001faef94c87a12.1607400596.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org
2020-12-08 12:16:57 +08:00
free_idle_time(cpufreq_cdev);
kfree(cpufreq_cdev);
thermal: add generic cpufreq cooling implementation This patchset introduces a new generic cooling device based on cpufreq that can be used on non-ACPI platforms. As a proof of concept, we have drivers for the following platforms using this mechanism now: * Samsung Exynos (Exynos4 and Exynos5) in the current patchset. * Freescale i.MX (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git imx6q_thermal) There is a small change in cpufreq cooling registration APIs, so a minor change is needed for Freescale platforms. Brief Description: 1) The generic cooling devices code is placed inside driver/thermal/* as placing inside acpi folder will need un-necessary enabling of acpi code. This code is architecture independent. 2) This patchset adds generic cpu cooling low level implementation through frequency clipping. In future, other cpu related cooling devices may be added here. An ACPI version of this already exists (drivers/acpi/processor_thermal.c) .But this will be useful for platforms like ARM using the generic thermal interface along with the generic cpu cooling devices. The cooling device registration API's return cooling device pointers which can be easily binded with the thermal zone trip points. The important APIs exposed are, a) struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( struct cpumask *clip_cpus) b) void cpufreq_cooling_unregister(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev) 3) Samsung exynos platform thermal implementation is done using the generic cpu cooling APIs and the new trip type. The temperature sensor driver present in the hwmon folder(registered as hwmon driver) is moved to thermal folder and registered as a thermal driver. A simple data/control flow diagrams is shown below, Core Linux thermal <-----> Exynos thermal interface <----- Temperature Sensor | | \|/ | Cpufreq cooling device <--------------- TODO: *Will send the DT enablement patches later after the driver is merged. This patch: Add support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level implementations using frequency scaling up/down based on the registration parameters. Different cpu related cooling devices can be registered by the user and the binding of these cooling devices to the corresponding trip points can be easily done as the registration APIs return the cooling device pointer. The user of these APIs are responsible for passing clipping frequency . The drivers can also register to recieve notification about any cooling action called. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix comment layout] Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@linaro.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> Cc: SangWook Ju <sw.ju@samsung.com> Cc: Durgadoss <durgadoss.r@intel.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kmpark@infradead.org> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
2012-08-16 19:41:40 +08:00
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_cooling_unregister);