Re: [PATCH 0/2] CPPC: reduce FFH feedback-counter sampling skew on arm64
Vanshidhar Konda <[email protected]> Fri, 26 Jun 2026 07:55:56 -0700
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.acpica-devel,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20260625-singing-fair-guillemot-9eb79e-vanshikonda@os.amperecomputing.com> |
On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 10:55:54AM +0800, Pengjie Zhang wrote: > >On 5/19/2026 6:47 PM, Will Deacon wrote: >>On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 06:00:44PM +0800, zhangpengjie (A) wrote: >>>Hi all, >>> >>>Gentle ping on this thread. It has been a while since I posted it. >>> >>>Could someone please take a look when you have time? If there is anything >>>I should revise or any additional information needed, I'd be happy to >>>update it. >>It's hard to find active folks who have contributed meaningfully to the >>cppc_acpi driver... I've added Ionella and Jeremy, in case they can take >>a look. >> >>Will >Thanks Will, and thanks for adding Ionela and Jeremy. > >While waiting for further comments, I would like to add some >test data to make the effect of this series clearer. > >On the test platform, the maximum frequency reported by the platform >is 2300000. I sampled cpuinfo_cur_freq before and after applying this >series. > >Before applying the series, the samples showed visible transient outliers. >??The minimum value was 2154583 and the maximum value was 2491071. >There were 8 samples above 2400000 and 8 samples below 2200000. >The largest value exceeded the platform maximum by about 8.3%. > >After applying the series, the samples became much more stable. >The minimum value was 2290243 and the maximum value was 2306310. >There were no samples above 2400000 and no samples below 2200000. >The largest value exceeded the platform maximum by only about 0.27%. > >A summary of the 96 samples is: > >?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? before?? ?? ?? ?? ?? after >min?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? 2154583?? ?? ?? ?? ??2290243 >max?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? 2491071?? ?? ?? ?? ??2306310 >range?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??336488?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??16067 >average?? ?? ?? ?? ?? 2298436.4?? ?? ?? ??2298479.4 >stddev?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??55184.1?? ?? ?? ?? ?? 2868.2 >samples > 2300000?? 26 / 96?? ?? ?? ?? ??16 / 96 >samples > 2400000?? ??8 / 96?? ?? ?? ?? ?? 0 / 96 >samples < 2200000?? ??8 / 96?? ?? ?? ?? ?? 0 / 96 > >So this series does not try to clamp the value to the platform maximum. >??Instead, it reduces the sampling skew between the delivered and reference >feedback counters. The remaining small deviation around 2300000 is >??much smaller than the previous transient spikes. > >One concern that may come up is that an FFH read may cause an idle >target CPU to be woken, depending on the platform/vendor implementation. >However, that behavior is not introduced by this series. It is already part >of how FFH counter reads are implemented on such platforms. This series >only changes the sampling form for the FFH feedback counters: when both >delivered and reference counters are FFH counters, read them together >instead of issuing two separate FFH reads. > >If the target CPU has to be involved for an FFH read, doing one paired >read should be no worse than doing two separate reads, and it also >narrows the sampling window between the two counters. > I agree with this point. It reduces the number of times the idle CPU is woken up just to read counters. >If there is any concern about the generic hook or the arm64 implementation, >I would be happy to revise it. > >The raw data is as follows: >before: >2303809 2294827 2300000 2293643 2290740 2300000 2297228 2296082 >2301707 2295354 2296601 2303163 2296766 2296543 2295412 2298394 >2297387 2300000 2308274 2301882 2297752 2418568 2491071 2300000 >2183264 2296238 2434731 2296721 2439777 2302159 2301773 2298226 >2300000 2305936 2301133 2297511 2300000 2300000 2294408 2298494 >2295011 2302721 2295955 2301505 2298064 2297419 2298933 2189595 >2298058 2296046 2300000 2301449 2414908 2296559 2305251 2166666 >2296626 2173303 2300000 2298806 2411389 2301822 2297291 2300000 >2423831 2297902 2300000 2435730 2302433 2295353 2298898 2296043 >2321868 2294907 2300000 2157841 2296052 2206530 2300000 2297811 >2297920 2294382 2297767 2157230 2302564 2298504 2296822 2300000 >2296868 2294866 2154583 2290888 2302542 2292549 2300000 2184259 > >after: >2303738 2296153 2298087 2295607 2301373 2298076 2300000 2295081 >2297788 2300000 2300000 2295238 2301449 2300000 2298488 2297911 >2301477 2298507 2294976 2296852 2293689 2294077 2293887 2292619 >2300000 2300000 2298072 2300000 2291943 2300000 2295370 2300000 >2301873 2304645 2300000 2296766 2300000 2300000 2290243 2297954 >2297183 2306310 2300000 2296889 2300000 2303800 2301970 2296888 >2300000 2301354 2300000 2298405 2298202 2296767 2298663 2302522 >2297821 2302471 2300000 2303233 2298226 2298698 2300000 2297291 >2296470 2300000 2298398 2300000 2295681 2300000 2300000 2296344 >2300000 2296008 2302375 2297977 2298447 2296519 2295565 2294866 >2297945 2300000 2294978 2303595 2300000 2300000 2294930 2301096 >2296271 2296086 2294482 2300000 2294843 2300000 2296803 2295708 I tested this series on Ampere AmpereOne A192-32X. Tested-by: Vanshidhar Konda <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Vanshidhar Konda <[email protected]> Regards, Vanshidhar Konda >>>On 4/10/2026 5:41 PM, Pengjie Zhang wrote: >>>>The legacy CPPC feedback-counter path reads the delivered and reference >>>>performance counters separately. >>>> >>>>On arm64 systems using AMU-backed CPPC FFH counters, each FFH read is >>>>served through a cross-CPU counter read helper. Reading the counters >>>>separately therefore widens the sampling window between them and can >>>>skew the delivered/reference ratio used by cpuinfo_cur_freq. Under heavy >>>>load, the skew is observable as transient values that may exceed the >>>>platform maximum, as discussed in [1] and [2]. >>>> >>>>This series adds a small generic hook for architectures that can obtain >>>>both FFH feedback counters in one operation, while preserving the >>>>existing per-register read path as the fallback. >>>> >>>>Patch 1 adds the generic CPPC hook and uses it from cppc_get_perf_ctrs(). >>>>Patch 2 implements the hook on arm64 by sampling both AMU counters in a >>>>single operation on the target CPU. >>>> >>>>[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ >>>>[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ >>>> >>>>Signed-off-by: Pengjie Zhang <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>Pengjie Zhang (2): >>>> ACPI: CPPC: add paired FFH feedback-counter read hook >>>> arm64: topology: read CPPC FFH feedback counters in one operation >>>> >>>> arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >>>> drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >>>> include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h | 7 ++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 127 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >>>>