[PATCH v2] cpufreq: x86: Make scaling_cur_freq behave more as expected
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Fri Jul 28 2017 - 08:53:12 EST
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
After commit f8475cef9008 "x86: use common aperfmperf_khz_on_cpu() to
calculate KHz using APERF/MPERF" the scaling_cur_freq policy attribute
in sysfs only behaves as expected on x86 with APERF/MPERF registers
available when it is read from at least twice in a row. The value
returned by the first read may not be meaningful, because the
computations in there use cached values from the previous iteration
of aperfmperf_snapshot_khz() which may be stale.
To prevent that from happening, modify arch_freq_get_on_cpu() to
call aperfmperf_snapshot_khz() twice, with a short delay between
these calls, if the previous invocation of aperfmperf_snapshot_khz()
was too far back in the past (specifically, more that 1s ago).
Also, as pointed out by Doug Smythies, aperf_delta is limited now
and the multiplication of it by cpu_khz won't overflow, so simplify
the s->khz computations too.
Fixes: f8475cef9008 "x86: use common aperfmperf_khz_on_cpu() to calculate KHz using APERF/MPERF"
Reported-by: Doug Smythies <dsmythies@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
---
-> v2: Simplify the khz computations as per the Doug's suggestion.
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/aperfmperf.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/aperfmperf.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/aperfmperf.c
+++ linux-pm/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/aperfmperf.c
@@ -8,20 +8,25 @@
* This file is licensed under GPLv2.
*/
-#include <linux/jiffies.h>
+#include <linux/delay.h>
+#include <linux/ktime.h>
#include <linux/math64.h>
#include <linux/percpu.h>
#include <linux/smp.h>
struct aperfmperf_sample {
unsigned int khz;
- unsigned long jiffies;
+ ktime_t time;
u64 aperf;
u64 mperf;
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct aperfmperf_sample, samples);
+#define APERFMPERF_CACHE_THRESHOLD_MS 10
+#define APERFMPERF_REFRESH_DELAY_MS 20
+#define APERFMPERF_STALE_THRESHOLD_MS 1000
+
/*
* aperfmperf_snapshot_khz()
* On the current CPU, snapshot APERF, MPERF, and jiffies
@@ -33,9 +38,11 @@ static void aperfmperf_snapshot_khz(void
u64 aperf, aperf_delta;
u64 mperf, mperf_delta;
struct aperfmperf_sample *s = this_cpu_ptr(&samples);
+ ktime_t now = ktime_get();
+ s64 time_delta = ktime_ms_delta(now, s->time);
- /* Don't bother re-computing within 10 ms */
- if (time_before(jiffies, s->jiffies + HZ/100))
+ /* Don't bother re-computing within the cache threshold time. */
+ if (time_delta < APERFMPERF_CACHE_THRESHOLD_MS)
return;
rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_APERF, aperf);
@@ -51,22 +58,21 @@ static void aperfmperf_snapshot_khz(void
if (mperf_delta == 0)
return;
- /*
- * if (cpu_khz * aperf_delta) fits into ULLONG_MAX, then
- * khz = (cpu_khz * aperf_delta) / mperf_delta
- */
- if (div64_u64(ULLONG_MAX, cpu_khz) > aperf_delta)
- s->khz = div64_u64((cpu_khz * aperf_delta), mperf_delta);
- else /* khz = aperf_delta / (mperf_delta / cpu_khz) */
- s->khz = div64_u64(aperf_delta,
- div64_u64(mperf_delta, cpu_khz));
- s->jiffies = jiffies;
+ s->time = now;
s->aperf = aperf;
s->mperf = mperf;
+
+ /* If the previous iteration was too long ago, discard it. */
+ if (time_delta > APERFMPERF_STALE_THRESHOLD_MS)
+ s->khz = 0;
+ else
+ s->khz = div64_u64((cpu_khz * aperf_delta), mperf_delta);
}
unsigned int arch_freq_get_on_cpu(int cpu)
{
+ unsigned int khz;
+
if (!cpu_khz)
return 0;
@@ -74,6 +80,12 @@ unsigned int arch_freq_get_on_cpu(int cp
return 0;
smp_call_function_single(cpu, aperfmperf_snapshot_khz, NULL, 1);
+ khz = per_cpu(samples.khz, cpu);
+ if (khz)
+ return khz;
+
+ msleep(APERFMPERF_REFRESH_DELAY_MS);
+ smp_call_function_single(cpu, aperfmperf_snapshot_khz, NULL, 1);
return per_cpu(samples.khz, cpu);
}