Re: [PATCH] drivers: thermal: step_wise: add support for hysteresis

From: Ram Chandrasekar
Date: Tue Jan 07 2020 - 19:31:59 EST

On 12/11/2019 6:35 AM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
On 21/11/2019 06:50, Amit Kucheria wrote:
From: Ram Chandrasekar <rkumbako@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Currently, step wise governor increases the mitigation when the
temperature goes above a threshold and decreases the mitigation when the
temperature goes below the threshold.

If there is a case where the
temperature is wavering around the threshold, the mitigation will be
applied and removed every iteration, which is not very efficient.

The use of hysteresis temperature could avoid this ping-pong of
mitigation by relaxing the mitigation to happen only when the
temperature goes below this lower hysteresis value.

What I'm worried about is how the hysteresis is used in the current
code, where the destination of this data is to set the value in the
sensor hardware if it is supported.

Using the hysteresis in the governor seems like abusing the initial
purpose of this information.

Moreover, the hysteresis creates a gray area where the above algorithm
(DROPPING && !throttle) => state-- or (RAISING && throttle) => state++
may drop the performances because we will continue mitigating even below
the threshold.

As the governor is an open-loop controller, I'm not sure if we can do
something except adding some kind of low pass filter to prevent
mitigation bounces.

We have two different use cases for the step wise algorithm, and the hysteresis makes sense only in one.

For example, say we are controlling CPU junction temperature at 95C. When using step wise, mitigation is applied iteratively and there is a possibility that temperature can shoot up before the algorithm can reach an optimal mitigation level to keep the temperature near threshold.

In order to help this state machine, we use a second back stop rule in the same thermal zone at a higher temperature (say 105C) with a hysteresis of 10C to mitigate CPU to a fixed value, by specifying upper/lower limit to be the same. The idea is that the second rule will place a hard hammer to bring the temperature down close to 95C and then it will remove the mitigation. Once mitigation is removed, the junction temperature rule state machine will re-adjust from that point to an optimal mitigation level. The junction temperature rule doesnât use hysteresis.

Another example is skin temperature mitigation for mobile devices, where the step wise algorithm with hysteresis just reduces the operating max frequency to a fixed value, when the threshold is reached. And the junction temperature rule starts mitigating from this operating max.

That is the reason we have not generalized or mandated the hysteresis usage in this patch. The idea is to use it selectively based on use case.

Signed-off-by: Ram Chandrasekar <rkumbako@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Lina Iyer <ilina@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[Rebased patch from downstream]
Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@xxxxxxxxxx>
drivers/thermal/step_wise.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c b/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
index 6e051cbd824ff..2c8a34a7cf959 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
* for this trip point
* d. if the trend is THERMAL_TREND_DROP_FULL, use lower limit
* for this trip point
- * If the temperature is lower than a trip point,
+ * If the temperature is lower than a hysteresis temperature,
* a. if the trend is THERMAL_TREND_RAISING, do nothing
* b. if the trend is THERMAL_TREND_DROPPING, use lower cooling
* state for this trip point, if the cooling state already
@@ -115,30 +115,31 @@ static void update_passive_instance(struct thermal_zone_device *tz,
static void thermal_zone_trip_update(struct thermal_zone_device *tz, int trip)
- int trip_temp;
+ int trip_temp, hyst_temp;
enum thermal_trip_type trip_type;
enum thermal_trend trend;
struct thermal_instance *instance;
- bool throttle = false;
+ bool throttle;
int old_target;
if (trip == THERMAL_TRIPS_NONE) {
- trip_temp = tz->forced_passive;
+ hyst_temp = trip_temp = tz->forced_passive;
} else {
tz->ops->get_trip_temp(tz, trip, &trip_temp);
+ hyst_temp = trip_temp;
+ if (tz->ops->get_trip_hyst) {
+ tz->ops->get_trip_hyst(tz, trip, &hyst_temp);
+ hyst_temp = trip_temp - hyst_temp;
+ }
tz->ops->get_trip_type(tz, trip, &trip_type);
trend = get_tz_trend(tz, trip);
- if (tz->temperature >= trip_temp) {
- throttle = true;
- trace_thermal_zone_trip(tz, trip, trip_type);
- }
- dev_dbg(&tz->device, "Trip%d[type=%d,temp=%d]:trend=%d,throttle=%d\n",
- trip, trip_type, trip_temp, trend, throttle);
+ dev_dbg(&tz->device,
+ "Trip%d[type=%d,temp=%d,hyst=%d]:trend=%d,throttle=%d\n",
+ trip, trip_type, trip_temp, hyst_temp, trend, throttle);
@@ -147,6 +148,18 @@ static void thermal_zone_trip_update(struct thermal_zone_device *tz, int trip)
old_target = instance->target;
+ throttle = false;
+ /*
+ * Lower the mitigation only if the temperature
+ * goes below the hysteresis temperature.
+ */
+ if (tz->temperature >= trip_temp ||
+ (tz->temperature >= hyst_temp &&
+ old_target != THERMAL_NO_TARGET)) {
+ throttle = true;
+ trace_thermal_zone_trip(tz, trip, trip_type);
+ }
instance->target = get_target_state(instance, trend, throttle);
dev_dbg(&instance->cdev->device, "old_target=%d, target=%d\n",
old_target, (int)instance->target);