Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Jun 2020 06:55:35 +0200 | From | Michal Miroslaw <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2][RFC] PM-runtime: add tracepoints to cover all usage_count changes |
| |
On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 03:14:59PM +0800, Chen Yu wrote: > Hi, > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 09:33:11PM +0200, Michal Miroslaw wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 03:05:52AM +0800, Chen Yu wrote: > > > Commit d229290689ae ("PM-runtime: add tracepoints for usage_count changes") > > > has added some tracepoints to monitor the change of runtime usage, and > > > there is something to improve: > > > 1. There are some places that adjust the usage count have not > > > been traced yet. For example, pm_runtime_get_noresume() and > > > pm_runtime_put_noidle() > > > 2. The change of the usage count will not be tracked if decreased > > > from 1 to 0. > > [...] > > > @@ -1448,16 +1453,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm_runtime_forbid); > > > */ > > > void pm_runtime_allow(struct device *dev) > > > { > > > + bool is_zero; > > > + > > > spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock); > > > if (dev->power.runtime_auto) > > > goto out; > > > > > > dev->power.runtime_auto = true; > > > - if (atomic_dec_and_test(&dev->power.usage_count)) > > > + is_zero = atomic_dec_and_test(&dev->power.usage_count); > > > + trace_rpm_usage_rcuidle(dev, RPM_AUTO | RPM_ASYNC); > > > + if (is_zero) > > > rpm_idle(dev, RPM_AUTO | RPM_ASYNC); > > > - else > > > - trace_rpm_usage_rcuidle(dev, RPM_AUTO | RPM_ASYNC); > > > - > > [...] > > > > IIRC, rpm_idle() has a tracepoint already. > > > Yes, this is what I concerned previously. If someone > want to track the change of usage_count, then he might > have to enable both trace rpm_usage and rpm_idle so > as to track the moment when the counter drops from 1 to > 0. It might be more consistent if we only enable > trace rpm_usage to track the whole process. > > > @@ -1523,9 +1529,8 @@ static void update_autosuspend(struct device *dev, int old_delay, int old_use) > > > /* If it used to be allowed then prevent it. */ > > > if (!old_use || old_delay >= 0) { > > > atomic_inc(&dev->power.usage_count); > > > - rpm_resume(dev, 0); > > > - } else { > > > trace_rpm_usage_rcuidle(dev, 0); > > > + rpm_resume(dev, 0); > > > } > > > } > > [...] > > > > This actually changes logic, so it doesn't match the patch description. > > > This patch intends to adjust the logic to be consistent with > the change of usage_counter, that is to say, only after the > counter has been possibly modified, we record it. In current > logic above, it tracks the usage count where the latter does > not change.
I see now what you intended. I think it would be nice to put the idea (that all usage changes be shown using rpm_usage even if included in other trace points) into the commit message. Otherwise, looks ok.
Best Regards Michał Mirosław
| |