Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates
 216.228.117.160 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=216.228.117.160; helo=mail.nvidia.com; pr=C
Message-ID: <8e755438-4b1f-b3d6-b2b8-a5efcca813bc@nvidia.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2023 00:29:57 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Provide an AMU-based version of
 arch_freq_get_on_cpu
To:     Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@arm.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
CC:     <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        <will@kernel.org>, <rafael@kernel.org>, <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        <sudeep.holla@arm.com>, <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>,
        <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>, <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
        Sumit Gupta <sumitg@nvidia.com>
References: <20230606155754.245998-1-beata.michalska@arm.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Sumit Gupta <sumitg@nvidia.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230606155754.245998-1-beata.michalska@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jun 2023 19:00:14.2570
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: aa4a4cc2-7c08-49eb-db8f-08db6d09961c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.117.160];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: CY4PEPF0000EE3B.namprd03.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN0PR12MB6367
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
        DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FORGED_SPF_HELO,
        NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,
        SPF_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no
        autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


On 06/06/23 21:27, Beata Michalska wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> With the Frequency Invariance Engine (FIE) being already wired up with
> sched tick and making use of relevant (core counter and constant
> counter) AMU counters, getting the current frequency for a given CPU
> on supported platforms, can be achieved by utilizing the frequency scale
> factor which reflects an average CPU frequency for the last tick period
> length.
> 
> With that at hand, arch_freq_get_on_cpu dedicated implementation
> gets enrolled into cpuinfo_cur_freq policy sysfs attribute handler,
> which is expected to represent the current frequency of a given CPU,
> as obtained by the hardware. This is exactly the type of feedback that
> cycle counters provide.
> 
> In order to avoid calling arch_freq_get_on_cpu from the scaling_cur_freq
> attribute handler for platforms that do provide cpuinfo_cur_freq, and
> yet keeping things intact for those platform that do not, its use gets
> conditioned on the presence of cpufreq_driver (*get) callback (which also
> seems to be the case for creating cpuinfo_cur_freq attribute).
> 

Tested the change with frequency switch stress test but was getting big 
delta between set and get freq.
After passing "nohz=off" and commenting "wfi" in "cpu_do_idle()", the
delta is less. This confirms that more delta is due to AMU counters
stopping at "WFI".

   +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/idle.c
   @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ void noinstr cpu_do_idle(void)
           arm_cpuidle_save_irq_context(&context);

           dsb(sy);
   -       wfi();
   +//     wfi();

I am not sure if the expected behavior here is right.
In our tests, we compare the last set frequency against the re-generated
value from counters to confirm that the CPU is actually running at the
requested frequency and the counters are working correct. But that won't
happen with this change.

In [1] and later in the updated patch within [2], we are busy looping
on the target CPU and avoid WFI to get the actual frequency.

Please share what you think is the right expected behavior.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230418113459.12860-7-sumitg@nvidia.com/
[2] 
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cde1d8a9-3a21-e82b-7895-40603a14d898@nvidia.com/T/#mb898a75fd0c72d166b26b04da3ad162afe068a82