Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] selftest/cpuidle: Add support for cpuidle latency
 measurement
To:     ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:     rjw@rjwysocki.net, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
        benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, srivatsa@csail.mit.edu,
        shuah@kernel.org, npiggin@gmail.com, svaidy@linux.ibm.com,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
References: <20200717091801.29289-1-psampat@linux.ibm.com>
 <20200717091801.29289-3-psampat@linux.ibm.com>
 <20200720055242.GB31497@in.ibm.com>
From:   Pratik Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <9465ac64-1f24-fea5-6c57-59cce00a2ba8@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:26:49 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200720055242.GB31497@in.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Gautham, Thanks for the review.


On 20/07/20 11:22 am, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> Hi Pratik,
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 02:48:01PM +0530, Pratik Rajesh Sampat wrote:
>> This patch adds support to trace IPI based and timer based wakeup
>> latency from idle states
>>
>> Latches onto the test-cpuidle_latency kernel module using the debugfs
>> interface to send IPIs or schedule a timer based event, which in-turn
>> populates the debugfs with the latency measurements.
>>
>> Currently for the IPI and timer tests; first disable all idle states
>> and then test for latency measurements incrementally enabling each state
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com>
> A few comments below.
>
>> ---
>>   tools/testing/selftests/Makefile           |   1 +
>>   tools/testing/selftests/cpuidle/Makefile   |   6 +
>>   tools/testing/selftests/cpuidle/cpuidle.sh | 257 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>   tools/testing/selftests/cpuidle/settings   |   1 +
>>   4 files changed, 265 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/cpuidle/Makefile
>>   create mode 100755 tools/testing/selftests/cpuidle/cpuidle.sh
>>   create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/cpuidle/settings
>>
> [..skip..]
>
>> +
>> +ins_mod()
>> +{
>> +	if [ ! -f "$MODULE" ]; then
>> +		printf "$MODULE module does not exist. Exitting\n"
> If the module has been compiled into the kernel (due to a
> localyesconfig, for instance), then it is unlikely that we will find
> it in /lib/modules. Perhaps you want to check if the debugfs
> directories created by the module exist, and if so, print a message
> saying that the modules is already loaded or some such?
>
That's a good idea. I can can grep for this module within /proc/modules
and not insert it, if it is already there

>> +		exit $ksft_skip
>> +	fi
>> +	printf "Inserting $MODULE module\n\n"
>> +	insmod $MODULE
>> +	if [ $? != 0 ]; then
>> +		printf "Insmod $MODULE failed\n"
>> +		exit $ksft_skip
>> +	fi
>> +}
>> +
>> +compute_average()
>> +{
>> +	arr=("$@")
>> +	sum=0
>> +	size=${#arr[@]}
>> +	for i in "${arr[@]}"
>> +	do
>> +		sum=$((sum + i))
>> +	done
>> +	avg=$((sum/size))
> It would be good to assert that "size" isn't 0 here.

Sure

>> +}
>> +
>> +# Disable all stop states
>> +disable_idle()
>> +{
>> +	for ((cpu=0; cpu<NUM_CPUS; cpu++))
>> +	do
>> +		for ((state=0; state<NUM_STATES; state++))
>> +		do
>> +			echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu$cpu/cpuidle/state$state/disable
> So, on offlined CPUs, we won't see
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu$cpu/cpuidle/state$state directory. You
> should probably perform this operation only on online CPUs.

Right. I should make CPU operations only on online CPUs all over the script

[..snip..]

Thanks
Pratik