x86: clean up smpboot.c's use of udelay+schedule

January 31st, 2012 - 12:00 am ET by Arjan van de Ven | Report spam
From 9f8dd2b15ff19ad73ee0eb235b4fdde9277185e8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:38:09 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] x86: clean up smpboot.c's use of udelay+schedule

smpboot.c does a udelay() followed by a schedule(); to yield
the CPU to other threads. This comes from the time when the kernel
did not yet have usleep_*() style APIs...

... nowadays, the kernel can do better than this, and this
patch replaces this code sequence with a usleep_range(),
so that the CPU is actually yielded for some real time.

Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>

arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 3 +--
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
index 66d250c..0b794c6 100644
a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -781,14 +781,13 @@ do_rest:
for (timeout = 0; timeout < 50000; timeout++) {
if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpu_callin_mask))
break; /* It has booted */
- udelay(100);
/*
* Allow other tasks to run while we wait for the
* AP to come online. This also gives a chance
* for the MTRR work(triggered by the AP coming online)
* to be completed in the stop machine context.
*/
- schedule();
+ usleep_range(100, 200);
}

if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpu_callin_mask))
1.7.6.4



Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
email Follow the discussionReplies 11 repliesReplies Make a reply

Replies

#1 Peter Zijlstra
January 31st, 2012 - 07:50 am ET | Report spam
On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 13:43 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Arjan van de Ven wrote:

> >From 9f8dd2b15ff19ad73ee0eb235b4fdde9277185e8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Arjan van de Ven
> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:38:09 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH] x86: clean up smpboot.c's use of udelay+schedule
>
> smpboot.c does a udelay() followed by a schedule(); to yield
> the CPU to other threads. This comes from the time when the kernel
> did not yet have usleep_*() style APIs...
>
> ... nowadays, the kernel can do better than this, and this
> patch replaces this code sequence with a usleep_range(),
> so that the CPU is actually yielded for some real time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven
>
> arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 3 +--
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> index 66d250c..0b794c6 100644
> a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> @@ -781,14 +781,13 @@ do_rest:
> for (timeout = 0; timeout < 50000; timeout++) {
> if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpu_callin_mask))
> break; /* It has booted */
> - udelay(100);
> /*
> * Allow other tasks to run while we wait for the
> * AP to come online. This also gives a chance
> * for the MTRR work(triggered by the AP coming online)
> * to be completed in the stop machine context.
> */
> - schedule();
> + usleep_range(100, 200);

I'm wondering whether we could shorten this delay to say 10
usecs and thus save 0.1 msecs (or more) from a typical SMP
bootup?



wait_on_completion_timeout() and have the fresh cpu do a wakeup when its
done. That way there's no need for a minimal wait time.

Anyway, all the cpu hotplug code is a friggin trainwreck and needs a
complete rewrite across all archs.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Similar topics