On 11/07/2017 01:58 AM, Abhishek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can you have a look at it?
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> Abhishek Goel
>
> System Engineer
>
> IBM India Pvt. Ltd.
>
Please refrain from top posting on kernel email thread.
In-lining comments and bottom posting is the norm.
>
> On 11/07/2017 12:50 PM, Abhishek Goel wrote:
>> cpuidle_monitor used to assume that cpu0 is always online which is not
>> a valid assumption on POWER machines. This patch fixes this by searching
>> for the first online cpu and uses it, instead of always using cpu0 for
>> monitoring which may not be online.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Abhishek Goel <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> v2: Commit message updated.
>> ---
>> tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c | 14 +++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c b/tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c
>> index 1b5da00..adacf99 100644
>> --- a/tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c
>> +++ b/tools/power/cpupower/utils/idle_monitor/cpuidle_sysfs.c
>> @@ -130,15 +130,23 @@ static struct cpuidle_monitor *cpuidle_register(void)
>> {
>> int num;
>> char *tmp;
>> + int first_online_cpu;
>> +
>> + for (num = 0; num < cpu_count; num++) {
>> + if (cpupower_is_cpu_online(num))
>> + break;
>> + };
>> + first_online_cpu = num;
Isn't it simpler to use sched_getcpu()n instead and use that instead
of walking the sysfs nodes since assumption is made that the idle state
count is the same for all CPUs
>>
>> /* Assume idle state count is the same for all CPUs */
>> - cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num = cpuidle_state_count(0);
This simply be:
cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num = cpuidle_state_count(sched_getcpu);
>> + cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num =
>> + cpuidle_state_count(first_online_cpu);
>>
>> if (cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num <= 0)
>> return NULL;
>>
>> for (num = 0; num < cpuidle_sysfs_monitor.hw_states_num; num++) {
>> - tmp = cpuidle_state_name(0, num);
>> + tmp = cpuidle_state_name(first_online_cpu, num);
>> if (tmp == NULL)
>> continue;
>>
>> @@ -146,7 +154,7 @@ static struct cpuidle_monitor *cpuidle_register(void)
>> strncpy(cpuidle_cstates[num].name, tmp, CSTATE_NAME_LEN - 1);
>> free(tmp);
>>
>> - tmp = cpuidle_state_desc(0, num);
>> + tmp = cpuidle_state_desc(first_online_cpu, num);
>> if (tmp == NULL)
>> continue;
>> strncpy(cpuidle_cstates[num].desc, tmp, CSTATE_DESC_LEN - 1);
>
thanks,
-- Shuah
From 1583432358807942595@xxx Tue Nov 07 18:19:32 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1583404291010222796
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread