aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/drivers/acpi
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorArjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>2006-09-30 23:27:17 -0700
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@g5.osdl.org>2006-10-01 00:39:19 -0700
commit5c87579e65ee4f419b2369407f82326d38b5d2d8 (patch)
tree3e015ba93eb6eefb7ed4318daf95be0771d596a8 /drivers/acpi
parent130c6b98984a058068ea595c465fba2beb48b9ef (diff)
downloadkernel_samsung_espresso10-5c87579e65ee4f419b2369407f82326d38b5d2d8.zip
kernel_samsung_espresso10-5c87579e65ee4f419b2369407f82326d38b5d2d8.tar.gz
kernel_samsung_espresso10-5c87579e65ee4f419b2369407f82326d38b5d2d8.tar.bz2
[PATCH] maximum latency tracking infrastructure
Add infrastructure to track "maximum allowable latency" for power saving policies. The reason for adding this infrastructure is that power management in the idle loop needs to make a tradeoff between latency and power savings (deeper power save modes have a longer latency to running code again). The code that today makes this tradeoff just does a rather simple algorithm; however this is not good enough: There are devices and use cases where a lower latency is required than that the higher power saving states provide. An example would be audio playback, but another example is the ipw2100 wireless driver that right now has a very direct and ugly acpi hook to disable some higher power states randomly when it gets certain types of error. The proposed solution is to have an interface where drivers can * announce the maximum latency (in microseconds) that they can deal with * modify this latency * give up their constraint and a function where the code that decides on power saving strategy can query the current global desired maximum. This patch has a user of each side: on the consumer side, ACPI is patched to use this, on the producer side the ipw2100 driver is patched. A generic maximum latency is also registered of 2 timer ticks (more and you lose accurate time tracking after all). While the existing users of the patch are x86 specific, the infrastructure is not. I'd like to ask the arch maintainers of other architectures if the infrastructure is generic enough for their use (assuming the architecture has such a tradeoff as concept at all), and the sound/multimedia driver owners to look at the driver facing API to see if this is something they can use. [akpm@osdl.org: cleanups] Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Acked-by: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@intel.com> Cc: "Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'drivers/acpi')
-rw-r--r--drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c38
1 files changed, 34 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
index 7106606..0a395fc 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/moduleparam.h>
#include <linux/sched.h> /* need_resched() */
+#include <linux/latency.h>
#include <asm/io.h>
#include <asm/uaccess.h>
@@ -453,7 +454,8 @@ static void acpi_processor_idle(void)
*/
if (cx->promotion.state &&
((cx->promotion.state - pr->power.states) <= max_cstate)) {
- if (sleep_ticks > cx->promotion.threshold.ticks) {
+ if (sleep_ticks > cx->promotion.threshold.ticks &&
+ cx->promotion.state->latency <= system_latency_constraint()) {
cx->promotion.count++;
cx->demotion.count = 0;
if (cx->promotion.count >=
@@ -494,8 +496,10 @@ static void acpi_processor_idle(void)
end:
/*
* Demote if current state exceeds max_cstate
+ * or if the latency of the current state is unacceptable
*/
- if ((pr->power.state - pr->power.states) > max_cstate) {
+ if ((pr->power.state - pr->power.states) > max_cstate ||
+ pr->power.state->latency > system_latency_constraint()) {
if (cx->demotion.state)
next_state = cx->demotion.state;
}
@@ -1009,9 +1013,11 @@ static int acpi_processor_power_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *offset)
seq_printf(seq, "active state: C%zd\n"
"max_cstate: C%d\n"
- "bus master activity: %08x\n",
+ "bus master activity: %08x\n"
+ "maximum allowed latency: %d usec\n",
pr->power.state ? pr->power.state - pr->power.states : 0,
- max_cstate, (unsigned)pr->power.bm_activity);
+ max_cstate, (unsigned)pr->power.bm_activity,
+ system_latency_constraint());
seq_puts(seq, "states:\n");
@@ -1077,6 +1083,28 @@ static const struct file_operations acpi_processor_power_fops = {
.release = single_release,
};
+static void smp_callback(void *v)
+{
+ /* we already woke the CPU up, nothing more to do */
+}
+
+/*
+ * This function gets called when a part of the kernel has a new latency
+ * requirement. This means we need to get all processors out of their C-state,
+ * and then recalculate a new suitable C-state. Just do a cross-cpu IPI; that
+ * wakes them all right up.
+ */
+static int acpi_processor_latency_notify(struct notifier_block *b,
+ unsigned long l, void *v)
+{
+ smp_call_function(smp_callback, NULL, 0, 1);
+ return NOTIFY_OK;
+}
+
+static struct notifier_block acpi_processor_latency_notifier = {
+ .notifier_call = acpi_processor_latency_notify,
+};
+
int acpi_processor_power_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
struct acpi_device *device)
{
@@ -1093,6 +1121,7 @@ int acpi_processor_power_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
"ACPI: processor limited to max C-state %d\n",
max_cstate);
first_run++;
+ register_latency_notifier(&acpi_processor_latency_notifier);
}
if (!pr)
@@ -1164,6 +1193,7 @@ int acpi_processor_power_exit(struct acpi_processor *pr,
* copies of pm_idle before proceeding.
*/
cpu_idle_wait();
+ unregister_latency_notifier(&acpi_processor_latency_notifier);
}
return 0;