Received: by 2002:a25:ab43:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id u61csp10592ybi; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:17:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyKunPbArIx3g7//7IzlfhjE0iZQjp6OlDgwBohRIJNxpfPWHKnQFHaACJG74ev3vPQT528 X-Received: by 2002:a63:c006:: with SMTP id h6mr4828733pgg.285.1560899846351; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:17:26 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1560899846; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=LxFvbyOz8VChG9O9wcCctNx7/JZRwBN9qoqa8lWUkRBOreiwt0GjltMLcVuQadUxBI 1cmMVeqj7/8gtETI3tBYBYqBsaDn7HW5IhEWnr2YVuR6M2c9APPyivOfVMeOlTGq8uMC /RRA8gu2jf1wpuRGdl46Bpml9750Xj9Aqdgyb2zT0bc/p5G4P1EGOCVE0d9YdX2dixOr JpwkS2NTUukD2yMkE5srNvbcEsO+N2WLlL9FfqD+zNCr9U9vkJliN1WDxTFCgxYU6Mn8 iI63WcHYC+sYWdSkWrnAyCoWQR4dlIkpKuW7mKfPcXfiBg1SHS5FQSmpmhNtJMWtJJ3x kjFA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=CIsSf2GXvyDDqSHsag5yZpphi9br2QVejLk/bHmvVOU=; b=YOvcH0qJuaJx4yfk+0wXMiqhXEwgu+GDMPjvKwMnUZfTku66bP6DFnSVbdh/wtbzcg zSEEuyCKXdCOUR+ElQYoDhTHZHU49X5LnBPw7/GtIqiIwB6m0/AAbPUCsXZ3aoXrZOlF jsNE797XgRYFMxbFRekXC6S6yZp5t7tW6J1Ow+XWvPGArmB+FJm8c1brbuRJC4ibsJwa PdzAtoW4ioGIbw/qvbfWvPz/3jntyUrwYbfcYnAyW7UnGkNrp1sX/XeQPjIh7sMC/hZs wYP5m0VC3OdgZY/ugqITajOp6CWZTWbh6BmVDkYLl/jiqA2zisfqg4dCGC0O11TdaRgG rXKg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@android.com header.s=20161025 header.b=RFEpZtIn; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=android.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k9si14868811pfh.56.2019.06.18.16.17.10; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:17:26 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@android.com header.s=20161025 header.b=RFEpZtIn; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=android.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729204AbfFRXP0 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 18 Jun 2019 19:15:26 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f67.google.com ([209.85.210.67]:39448 "EHLO mail-ot1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726091AbfFRXP0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jun 2019 19:15:26 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f67.google.com with SMTP id r21so14381517otq.6 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:15:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=android.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CIsSf2GXvyDDqSHsag5yZpphi9br2QVejLk/bHmvVOU=; b=RFEpZtInek3Io86FQLQYPSGxY5DbPdOrWHexhniqE/836Q7GoKyLBn5C/t/u+NyiOm k91tU09m/SUR6H+dxUwX47Mx4GxGk1hO2WU7XCGEQgxBh6DQSwf6heoiugn9iNCP6o5F z0oWkzGRcr+eDW8VjYY3lDtJld2zAiNrHmEkRMTX8rm2qA96nYlH41u3teob2jmMXlYF t5acmoJ55ZKaiOWycmMm5ZqMgAzS36wBkDzLqNjJ6qe7bdv0/tAUs+OZeZdiAEyKUSx+ IoTYLES+7UrlT3ovI04C3hEM6/FCT+4dMoRFCP6QvEZZjdDVg+h4Mmak/08Vnz1J24dL PuuQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CIsSf2GXvyDDqSHsag5yZpphi9br2QVejLk/bHmvVOU=; b=rjAd67wLNbw5Xt2gMgCejy318BtnwH8hoz0W/LExccytypHgwoWymtMFuIaYgmrH8l ApKzRG8qj8iHhqvSsGJPAlaGMK2WNgGWGi5xtBHVxMi6iD0VHOHhK7tUDsF/zpt3b3Z3 40cJsYevHL5mEQD6LY/aPguitmVj2tTy/sZIKS6SDz5+SfENL87NFvzch1ZtPEuKfPkF V/OOYsUwKs86P7FYWebcclAbM8EpOUy6EMHkq5kQXDPMaJmvSkbEOP/wlWZNN4QjdCNE cX7goF8PmA2M07AN1Gejy+b+f7yesiY8bUve4ar76P16zafv9X/DP+9RIQbVwOUlLU2O MBOw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWBFUFJofwSH/ID1myUa3+7i22WjfInKCYcfAgLPI0rHHPZIx+N Ibxpy0JPCQSOmakvdZ6w7IBgD/URPHnXne+YmyEFyw== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5911:: with SMTP id t17mr17885454oth.159.1560899725814; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:15:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190618182502.GC203031@google.com> <4587569.x9DSL43cXO@kreacher> In-Reply-To: <4587569.x9DSL43cXO@kreacher> From: Tri Vo Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:15:14 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Alternatives to /sys/kernel/debug/wakeup_sources To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Sandeep Patil , Viresh Kumar , Hridya Valsaraju , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 2:23 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 10:17:16 PM CEST Sandeep Patil wrote: > > > > Hi Rafael, Viresh etc. > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:31:16AM -0700, Tri Vo wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:23 PM Tri Vo wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello Rafael, > > > > > > > > Currently, Android reads wakeup sources statistics from > > > > /sys/kernel/debug/wakeup_sources in production environment. This > > > > information is used, for example, to report which wake lock prevents > > > > the device from suspending. > > > > Android's usage of the 'wakeup_sources' from debugfs can is linked at[1]. > > Basically, android's battery stats implementation to plot history for suspend > > blocking wakeup sources over device's boot cycle. This is used both for power > > specific bug reporting but also is one of the stats that will be used towards > > attributing the battery consumption to specific processes over the period of > > time. > > > > Android depended on the out-of-tree /proc/wakelocks before and now relies on > > wakeup_sources debugfs entry heavily for the aforementioned use cases. > > > > > > > > > > Android userspace reading wakeup_sources is not ideal because: > > > > - Debugfs API is not stable, i.e. Android tools built on top of it are > > > > not guaranteed to be backward/forward compatible. > > > > - This file requires debugfs to be mounted, which itself is > > > > undesirable for security reasons. > > > > > > > > To address these problems, we want to contribute a way to expose these > > > > statistics that doesn't depend on debugfs. > > > > > > > > Some initial thoughts/questions: Should we expose the stats in sysfs? > > > > Or maybe implement eBPF-based solution? What do you think? > > > > We are going through Android's out-of-tree kernel dependencies along with > > userspace APIs that are not necessarily considered "stable and forever > > supported" upstream. The debugfs dependencies showed up on our radar as a > > result and so we are wondering if we should worry about changes in debugfs > > interface and hence the question(s) below. > > > > So, can we rely on /d/wakeup_sources to be considered a userspace API and > > hence maintained stable as we do for other /proc and /sys entries? > > > > If yes, then we will go ahead and add tests for this in LTP or > > somewhere else suitable. > > No, debugfs is not ABI. > > > If no, then we would love to hear suggestions for any changes that need to be > > made or we simply just move the debugfs entry into somewhere like > > /sys/power/ ? > > No, moving that entire file from debugfs into sysfs is not an option either. > > The statistics for the wakeup sources associated with devices are already there > under /sys/devices/.../power/ , but I guess you want all wakeup sources? > > That would require adding a kobject to struct wakeup_source and exposing > all of the statistics as separate attributes under it. In which case it would be > good to replace the existing wakeup statistics under /sys/devices/.../power/ > with symbolic links to the attributes under the wakeup_source kobject. Thanks for your input, Rafael! Your suggestion makes sense. I'll work on a patch for this. > > > As a side effect, if the entry moves out of debugfs, Android can run without > > mounting debugfs in production that I assume is a good thing. > > And really Android developers might have thought about this a bit earlier. I'm still learning about kernel development. And Android has made missteps before. So I figured it's a good idea to ask first :) Thanks!