Re: [patch for 2.6.30 2/2] arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:avoid cross-CPU interrupts

From: Len Brown
Date: Sun Apr 19 2009 - 22:57:46 EST




> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In drv_read(), check to see whether we can run the rdmsr() on the current
> CPU. If so, do that. So smp_call_function_single() can avoid the IPI.
>
> Arguably, cpumask_any() should do this.
>
> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@xxxxxx>
> Cc: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
>
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c~arch-x86-kernel-cpu-cpufreq-acpi-cpufreqc-avoid-cross-cpu-interrupts arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c~arch-x86-kernel-cpu-cpufreq-acpi-cpufreqc-avoid-cross-cpu-interrupts
> +++ a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> @@ -197,9 +197,22 @@ static void do_drv_write(void *_cmd)
>
> static void drv_read(struct drv_cmd *cmd)
> {
> - cmd->val = 0;
> + int target_cpu; /* The CPU on which to perform thr rdmsr() */
> + int this_cpu;
> +
> + /*
> + * If the current CPU is in cmd->mask then run the rdmsr() on this
> + * CPU to avoid the cross-cpu interrupt.
> + */
> + this_cpu = get_cpu();
> + if (cpu_isset(this_cpu, *(cmd->mask)))
> + target_cpu = this_cpu;
> + else
> + target_cpu = cpumask_any(cmd->mask);
>
> - smp_call_function_single(cpumask_any(cmd->mask), do_drv_read, cmd, 1);
> + cmd->val = 0;
> + smp_call_function_single(target_cpu, do_drv_read, cmd, 1);
> + put_cpu();
> }
>
> static void drv_write(struct drv_cmd *cmd)
> _

Rather than this patch I would expect we would want to either:

A. as we went to the trouble to detect the local case
in drv_read, why call smp_call_function at all for that case?

or

B. optimize smp_call_function_single to beneift all users
instead of just this customer.

thanks,
-Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/