linux.git/kernel/power/energy_model.c, branch v5.10.258 Clone of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git PM: EM: fix memory leak with using debugfs_lookup() 2023-03-11T15:39:51+00:00 Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org 2023-02-02T15:15:15+00:00 e974e8f1e37d22c0de07374f8ddc84073fef2f1d [ Upstream commit a0e8c13ccd6a9a636d27353da62c2410c4eca337 ] When calling debugfs_lookup() the result must have dput() called on it, otherwise the memory will leak over time. To make things simpler, just call debugfs_lookup_and_remove() instead which handles all of the logic at once. Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit a0e8c13ccd6a9a636d27353da62c2410c4eca337 ]

When calling debugfs_lookup() the result must have dput() called on it,
otherwise the memory will leak over time.  To make things simpler, just
call debugfs_lookup_and_remove() instead which handles all of the logic
at once.

Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
PM: EM: Fix inefficient states detection 2021-11-18T13:04:06+00:00 Vincent Donnefort vincent.donnefort@arm.com 2021-09-08T14:05:22+00:00 1b2d422a261b8dcf6168e2ac1fd5bd872f8d6aa9 [ Upstream commit aa1a43262ad5df010768f69530fa179ff81651d3 ] Currently, a debug message is printed if an inefficient state is detected in the Energy Model. Unfortunately, it won't detect if the first state is inefficient or if two successive states are. Fix this behavior. Fixes: 27871f7a8a34 (PM: Introduce an Energy Model management framework) Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit aa1a43262ad5df010768f69530fa179ff81651d3 ]

Currently, a debug message is printed if an inefficient state is detected
in the Energy Model. Unfortunately, it won't detect if the first state is
inefficient or if two successive states are. Fix this behavior.

Fixes: 27871f7a8a34 (PM: Introduce an Energy Model management framework)
Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
PM: EM: Increase energy calculation precision 2021-09-15T07:50:37+00:00 Lukasz Luba lukasz.luba@arm.com 2021-08-03T10:27:43+00:00 d6337dfd1e772660102316ec04c5a2d3ef7bf7d1 [ Upstream commit 7fcc17d0cb12938d2b3507973a6f93fc9ed2c7a1 ] The Energy Model (EM) provides useful information about device power in each performance state to other subsystems like: Energy Aware Scheduler (EAS). The energy calculation in EAS does arithmetic operation based on the EM em_cpu_energy(). Current implementation of that function uses em_perf_state::cost as a pre-computed cost coefficient equal to: cost = power * max_frequency / frequency. The 'power' is expressed in milli-Watts (or in abstract scale). There are corner cases when the EAS energy calculation for two Performance Domains (PDs) return the same value. The EAS compares these values to choose smaller one. It might happen that this values are equal due to rounding error. In such scenario, we need better resolution, e.g. 1000 times better. To provide this possibility increase the resolution in the em_perf_state::cost for 64-bit architectures. The cost of increasing resolution on 32-bit is pretty high (64-bit division) and is not justified since there are no new 32bit big.LITTLE EAS systems expected which would benefit from this higher resolution. This patch allows to avoid the rounding to milli-Watt errors, which might occur in EAS energy estimation for each PD. The rounding error is common for small tasks which have small utilization value. There are two places in the code where it makes a difference: 1. In the find_energy_efficient_cpu() where we are searching for best_delta. We might suffer there when two PDs return the same result, like in the example below. Scenario: Low utilized system e.g. ~200 sum_util for PD0 and ~220 for PD1. There are quite a few small tasks ~10-15 util. These tasks would suffer for the rounding error. These utilization values are typical when running games on Android. One of our partners has reported 5..10mA less battery drain when running with increased resolution. Some details: We have two PDs: PD0 (big) and PD1 (little) Let's compare w/o patch set ('old') and w/ patch set ('new') We are comparing energy w/ task and w/o task placed in the PDs a) 'old' w/o patch set, PD0 task_util = 13 cost = 480 sum_util_w/o_task = 215 sum_util_w_task = 228 scale_cpu = 1024 energy_w/o_task = 480 * 215 / 1024 = 100.78 => 100 energy_w_task = 480 * 228 / 1024 = 106.87 => 106 energy_diff = 106 - 100 = 6 (this is equal to 'old' PD1's energy_diff in 'c)') b) 'new' w/ patch set, PD0 task_util = 13 cost = 480 * 1000 = 480000 sum_util_w/o_task = 215 sum_util_w_task = 228 energy_w/o_task = 480000 * 215 / 1024 = 100781 energy_w_task = 480000 * 228 / 1024 = 106875 energy_diff = 106875 - 100781 = 6094 (this is not equal to 'new' PD1's energy_diff in 'd)') c) 'old' w/o patch set, PD1 task_util = 13 cost = 160 sum_util_w/o_task = 283 sum_util_w_task = 293 scale_cpu = 355 energy_w/o_task = 160 * 283 / 355 = 127.55 => 127 energy_w_task = 160 * 296 / 355 = 133.41 => 133 energy_diff = 133 - 127 = 6 (this is equal to 'old' PD0's energy_diff in 'a)') d) 'new' w/ patch set, PD1 task_util = 13 cost = 160 * 1000 = 160000 sum_util_w/o_task = 283 sum_util_w_task = 293 scale_cpu = 355 energy_w/o_task = 160000 * 283 / 355 = 127549 energy_w_task = 160000 * 296 / 355 = 133408 energy_diff = 133408 - 127549 = 5859 (this is not equal to 'new' PD0's energy_diff in 'b)') 2. Difference in the 6% energy margin filter at the end of find_energy_efficient_cpu(). With this patch the margin comparison also has better resolution, so it's possible to have better task placement thanks to that. Fixes: 27871f7a8a341ef ("PM: Introduce an Energy Model management framework") Reported-by: CCJ Yeh <CCj.Yeh@mediatek.com> Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 7fcc17d0cb12938d2b3507973a6f93fc9ed2c7a1 ]

The Energy Model (EM) provides useful information about device power in
each performance state to other subsystems like: Energy Aware Scheduler
(EAS). The energy calculation in EAS does arithmetic operation based on
the EM em_cpu_energy(). Current implementation of that function uses
em_perf_state::cost as a pre-computed cost coefficient equal to:
cost = power * max_frequency / frequency.
The 'power' is expressed in milli-Watts (or in abstract scale).

There are corner cases when the EAS energy calculation for two Performance
Domains (PDs) return the same value. The EAS compares these values to
choose smaller one. It might happen that this values are equal due to
rounding error. In such scenario, we need better resolution, e.g. 1000
times better. To provide this possibility increase the resolution in the
em_perf_state::cost for 64-bit architectures. The cost of increasing
resolution on 32-bit is pretty high (64-bit division) and is not justified
since there are no new 32bit big.LITTLE EAS systems expected which would
benefit from this higher resolution.

This patch allows to avoid the rounding to milli-Watt errors, which might
occur in EAS energy estimation for each PD. The rounding error is common
for small tasks which have small utilization value.

There are two places in the code where it makes a difference:
1. In the find_energy_efficient_cpu() where we are searching for
best_delta. We might suffer there when two PDs return the same result,
like in the example below.

Scenario:
Low utilized system e.g. ~200 sum_util for PD0 and ~220 for PD1. There
are quite a few small tasks ~10-15 util. These tasks would suffer for
the rounding error. These utilization values are typical when running games
on Android. One of our partners has reported 5..10mA less battery drain
when running with increased resolution.

Some details:
We have two PDs: PD0 (big) and PD1 (little)
Let's compare w/o patch set ('old') and w/ patch set ('new')
We are comparing energy w/ task and w/o task placed in the PDs

a) 'old' w/o patch set, PD0
task_util = 13
cost = 480
sum_util_w/o_task = 215
sum_util_w_task = 228
scale_cpu = 1024
energy_w/o_task = 480 * 215 / 1024 = 100.78 => 100
energy_w_task = 480 * 228 / 1024 = 106.87 => 106
energy_diff = 106 - 100 = 6
(this is equal to 'old' PD1's energy_diff in 'c)')

b) 'new' w/ patch set, PD0
task_util = 13
cost = 480 * 1000 = 480000
sum_util_w/o_task = 215
sum_util_w_task = 228
energy_w/o_task = 480000 * 215 / 1024 = 100781
energy_w_task = 480000 * 228 / 1024  = 106875
energy_diff = 106875 - 100781 = 6094
(this is not equal to 'new' PD1's energy_diff in 'd)')

c) 'old' w/o patch set, PD1
task_util = 13
cost = 160
sum_util_w/o_task = 283
sum_util_w_task = 293
scale_cpu = 355
energy_w/o_task = 160 * 283 / 355 = 127.55 => 127
energy_w_task = 160 * 296 / 355 = 133.41 => 133
energy_diff = 133 - 127 = 6
(this is equal to 'old' PD0's energy_diff in 'a)')

d) 'new' w/ patch set, PD1
task_util = 13
cost = 160 * 1000 = 160000
sum_util_w/o_task = 283
sum_util_w_task = 293
scale_cpu = 355
energy_w/o_task = 160000 * 283 / 355 = 127549
energy_w_task = 160000 * 296 / 355 =   133408
energy_diff = 133408 - 127549 = 5859
(this is not equal to 'new' PD0's energy_diff in 'b)')

2. Difference in the 6% energy margin filter at the end of
find_energy_efficient_cpu(). With this patch the margin comparison also
has better resolution, so it's possible to have better task placement
thanks to that.

Fixes: 27871f7a8a341ef ("PM: Introduce an Energy Model management framework")
Reported-by: CCJ Yeh <CCj.Yeh@mediatek.com>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
PM: EM: postpone creating the debugfs dir till fs_initcall 2021-03-30T12:32:04+00:00 Lukasz Luba lukasz.luba@arm.com 2021-03-23T14:56:08+00:00 7d019b2d0f270219646c53cbba7c633fec76b5cb [ Upstream commit fb9d62b27ab1e07d625591549c314b7d406d21df ] The debugfs directory '/sys/kernel/debug/energy_model' is needed before the Energy Model registration can happen. With the recent change in debugfs subsystem it's not allowed to create this directory at early stage (core_initcall). Thus creating this directory would fail. Postpone the creation of the EM debug dir to later stage: fs_initcall. It should be safe since all clients: CPUFreq drivers, Devfreq drivers will be initialized in later stages. The custom debug log below prints the time of creation the EM debug dir at fs_initcall and successful registration of EMs at later stages. [ 1.505717] energy_model: creating rootdir [ 3.698307] cpu cpu0: EM: created perf domain [ 3.709022] cpu cpu1: EM: created perf domain Fixes: 56348560d495 ("debugfs: do not attempt to create a new file before the filesystem is initalized") Reported-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit fb9d62b27ab1e07d625591549c314b7d406d21df ]

The debugfs directory '/sys/kernel/debug/energy_model' is needed before
the Energy Model registration can happen. With the recent change in
debugfs subsystem it's not allowed to create this directory at early
stage (core_initcall). Thus creating this directory would fail.

Postpone the creation of the EM debug dir to later stage: fs_initcall.

It should be safe since all clients: CPUFreq drivers, Devfreq drivers
will be initialized in later stages.

The custom debug log below prints the time of creation the EM debug dir
at fs_initcall and successful registration of EMs at later stages.

[    1.505717] energy_model: creating rootdir
[    3.698307] cpu cpu0: EM: created perf domain
[    3.709022] cpu cpu1: EM: created perf domain

Fixes: 56348560d495 ("debugfs: do not attempt to create a new file before the filesystem is initalized")
Reported-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
PM / EM: remove em_register_perf_domain 2020-06-24T15:16:42+00:00 Lukasz Luba lukasz.luba@arm.com 2020-05-27T09:58:51+00:00 07891f15d91317b2220a0b610a2d7e324a88105d Remove old function em_register_perf_domain which is no longer needed. There is em_dev_register_perf_domain that covers old use cases and new as well. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
Remove old function em_register_perf_domain which is no longer needed.
There is em_dev_register_perf_domain that covers old use cases and new as
well.

Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
PM / EM: add support for other devices than CPUs in Energy Model 2020-06-24T15:16:27+00:00 Lukasz Luba lukasz.luba@arm.com 2020-06-10T10:12:23+00:00 1bc138c622959979eb547be2d3bbc6442a5c80b0 Add support for other devices than CPUs. The registration function does not require a valid cpumask pointer and is ready to handle new devices. Some of the internal structures has been reorganized in order to keep consistent view (like removing per_cpu pd pointers). Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
Add support for other devices than CPUs. The registration function
does not require a valid cpumask pointer and is ready to handle new
devices. Some of the internal structures has been reorganized in order to
keep consistent view (like removing per_cpu pd pointers).

Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
PM / EM: update callback structure and add device pointer 2020-06-24T15:14:07+00:00 Lukasz Luba lukasz.luba@arm.com 2020-05-27T09:58:49+00:00 d0351cc3b0f57214d157e4d589564730af2aedae The Energy Model framework is going to support devices other that CPUs. In order to make this happen change the callback function and add pointer to a device as an argument. Update the related users to use new function and new callback from the Energy Model. Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
The Energy Model framework is going to support devices other that CPUs. In
order to make this happen change the callback function and add pointer to
a device as an argument.

Update the related users to use new function and new callback from the
Energy Model.

Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
PM / EM: introduce em_dev_register_perf_domain function 2020-06-24T15:14:07+00:00 Lukasz Luba lukasz.luba@arm.com 2020-05-27T09:58:48+00:00 7d9895c7fbfc9c70afce7029b7de0f3f974adb88 Add now function in the Energy Model framework which is going to support new devices. This function will help in transition and make it smoother. For now it still checks if the cpumask is a valid pointer, which will be removed later when the new structures and infrastructure will be ready. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
Add now function in the Energy Model framework which is going to support
new devices. This function will help in transition and make it smoother.
For now it still checks if the cpumask is a valid pointer, which will be
removed later when the new structures and infrastructure will be ready.

Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
PM / EM: change naming convention from 'capacity' to 'performance' 2020-06-24T15:14:07+00:00 Lukasz Luba lukasz.luba@arm.com 2020-05-27T09:58:47+00:00 521b512b157a1315ff2bf11c11ab184c79515aea The Energy Model uses concept of performance domain and capacity states in order to calculate power used by CPUs. Change naming convention from capacity to performance state would enable wider usage in future, e.g. upcoming support for other devices other than CPUs. Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> 
The Energy Model uses concept of performance domain and capacity states in
order to calculate power used by CPUs. Change naming convention from
capacity to performance state would enable wider usage in future, e.g.
upcoming support for other devices other than CPUs.

Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
sched/topology: Remove unused 'sd' parameter from arch_scale_cpu_capacity() 2019-06-24T17:23:39+00:00 Vincent Guittot vincent.guittot@linaro.org 2019-06-17T15:00:17+00:00 8ec59c0f5f4966f89f4e3e3cab81710c7fa959d0 The 'struct sched_domain *sd' parameter to arch_scale_cpu_capacity() is unused since commit: 765d0af19f5f ("sched/topology: Remove the ::smt_gain field from 'struct sched_domain'") Remove it. Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: linux@armlinux.org.uk Cc: quentin.perret@arm.com Cc: rafael@kernel.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1560783617-5827-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> 
The 'struct sched_domain *sd' parameter to arch_scale_cpu_capacity() is
unused since commit:

  765d0af19f5f ("sched/topology: Remove the ::smt_gain field from 'struct sched_domain'")

Remove it.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: linux@armlinux.org.uk
Cc: quentin.perret@arm.com
Cc: rafael@kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1560783617-5827-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>