| ========================================================= |
| Cluster-wide Power-up/power-down race avoidance algorithm |
| ========================================================= |
| |
| This file documents the algorithm which is used to coordinate CPU and |
| cluster setup and teardown operations and to manage hardware coherency |
| controls safely. |
| |
| The section "Rationale" explains what the algorithm is for and why it is |
| needed. "Basic model" explains general concepts using a simplified view |
| of the system. The other sections explain the actual details of the |
| algorithm in use. |
| |
| |
| Rationale |
| --------- |
| |
| In a system containing multiple CPUs, it is desirable to have the |
| ability to turn off individual CPUs when the system is idle, reducing |
| power consumption and thermal dissipation. |
| |
| In a system containing multiple clusters of CPUs, it is also desirable |
| to have the ability to turn off entire clusters. |
| |
| Turning entire clusters off and on is a risky business, because it |
| involves performing potentially destructive operations affecting a group |
| of independently running CPUs, while the OS continues to run. This |
| means that we need some coordination in order to ensure that critical |
| cluster-level operations are only performed when it is truly safe to do |
| so. |
| |
| Simple locking may not be sufficient to solve this problem, because |
| mechanisms like Linux spinlocks may rely on coherency mechanisms which |
| are not immediately enabled when a cluster powers up. Since enabling or |
| disabling those mechanisms may itself be a non-atomic operation (such as |
| writing some hardware registers and invalidating large caches), other |
| methods of coordination are required in order to guarantee safe |
| power-down and power-up at the cluster level. |
| |
| The mechanism presented in this document describes a coherent memory |
| based protocol for performing the needed coordination. It aims to be as |
| lightweight as possible, while providing the required safety properties. |
| |
| |
| Basic model |
| ----------- |
| |
| Each cluster and CPU is assigned a state, as follows: |
| |
| - DOWN |
| - COMING_UP |
| - UP |
| - GOING_DOWN |
| |
| :: |
| |
| +---------> UP ----------+ |
| | v |
| |
| COMING_UP GOING_DOWN |
| |
| ^ | |
| +--------- DOWN <--------+ |
| |
| |
| DOWN: |
| The CPU or cluster is not coherent, and is either powered off or |
| suspended, or is ready to be powered off or suspended. |
| |
| COMING_UP: |
| The CPU or cluster has committed to moving to the UP state. |
| It may be part way through the process of initialisation and |
| enabling coherency. |
| |
| UP: |
| The CPU or cluster is active and coherent at the hardware |
| level. A CPU in this state is not necessarily being used |
| actively by the kernel. |
| |
| GOING_DOWN: |
| The CPU or cluster has committed to moving to the DOWN |
| state. It may be part way through the process of teardown and |
| coherency exit. |
| |
| |
| Each CPU has one of these states assigned to it at any point in time. |
| The CPU states are described in the "CPU state" section, below. |
| |
| Each cluster is also assigned a state, but it is necessary to split the |
| state value into two parts (the "cluster" state and "inbound" state) and |
| to introduce additional states in order to avoid races between different |
| CPUs in the cluster simultaneously modifying the state. The cluster- |
| level states are described in the "Cluster state" section. |
| |
| To help distinguish the CPU states from cluster states in this |
| discussion, the state names are given a `CPU_` prefix for the CPU states, |
| and a `CLUSTER_` or `INBOUND_` prefix for the cluster states. |
| |
| |
| CPU state |
| --------- |
| |
| In this algorithm, each individual core in a multi-core processor is |
| referred to as a "CPU". CPUs are assumed to be single-threaded: |
| therefore, a CPU can only be doing one thing at a single point in time. |
| |
| This means that CPUs fit the basic model closely. |
| |
| The algorithm defines the following states for each CPU in the system: |
| |
| - CPU_DOWN |
| - CPU_COMING_UP |
| - CPU_UP |
| - CPU_GOING_DOWN |
| |
| :: |
| |
| cluster setup and |
| CPU setup complete policy decision |
| +-----------> CPU_UP ------------+ |
| | v |
| |
| CPU_COMING_UP CPU_GOING_DOWN |
| |
| ^ | |
| +----------- CPU_DOWN <----------+ |
| policy decision CPU teardown complete |
| or hardware event |
| |
| |
| The definitions of the four states correspond closely to the states of |
| the basic model. |
| |
| Transitions between states occur as follows. |
| |
| A trigger event (spontaneous) means that the CPU can transition to the |
| next state as a result of making local progress only, with no |
| requirement for any external event to happen. |
| |
| |
| CPU_DOWN: |
| A CPU reaches the CPU_DOWN state when it is ready for |
| power-down. On reaching this state, the CPU will typically |
| power itself down or suspend itself, via a WFI instruction or a |
| firmware call. |
| |
| Next state: |
| CPU_COMING_UP |
| Conditions: |
| none |
| |
| Trigger events: |
| a) an explicit hardware power-up operation, resulting |
| from a policy decision on another CPU; |
| |
| b) a hardware event, such as an interrupt. |
| |
| |
| CPU_COMING_UP: |
| A CPU cannot start participating in hardware coherency until the |
| cluster is set up and coherent. If the cluster is not ready, |
| then the CPU will wait in the CPU_COMING_UP state until the |
| cluster has been set up. |
| |
| Next state: |
| CPU_UP |
| Conditions: |
| The CPU's parent cluster must be in CLUSTER_UP. |
| Trigger events: |
| Transition of the parent cluster to CLUSTER_UP. |
| |
| Refer to the "Cluster state" section for a description of the |
| CLUSTER_UP state. |
| |
| |
| CPU_UP: |
| When a CPU reaches the CPU_UP state, it is safe for the CPU to |
| start participating in local coherency. |
| |
| This is done by jumping to the kernel's CPU resume code. |
| |
| Note that the definition of this state is slightly different |
| from the basic model definition: CPU_UP does not mean that the |
| CPU is coherent yet, but it does mean that it is safe to resume |
| the kernel. The kernel handles the rest of the resume |
| procedure, so the remaining steps are not visible as part of the |
| race avoidance algorithm. |
| |
| The CPU remains in this state until an explicit policy decision |
| is made to shut down or suspend the CPU. |
| |
| Next state: |
| CPU_GOING_DOWN |
| Conditions: |
| none |
| Trigger events: |
| explicit policy decision |
| |
| |
| CPU_GOING_DOWN: |
| While in this state, the CPU exits coherency, including any |
| operations required to achieve this (such as cleaning data |
| caches). |
| |
| Next state: |
| CPU_DOWN |
| Conditions: |
| local CPU teardown complete |
| Trigger events: |
| (spontaneous) |
| |
| |
| Cluster state |
| ------------- |
| |
| A cluster is a group of connected CPUs with some common resources. |
| Because a cluster contains multiple CPUs, it can be doing multiple |
| things at the same time. This has some implications. In particular, a |
| CPU can start up while another CPU is tearing the cluster down. |
| |
| In this discussion, the "outbound side" is the view of the cluster state |
| as seen by a CPU tearing the cluster down. The "inbound side" is the |
| view of the cluster state as seen by a CPU setting the CPU up. |
| |
| In order to enable safe coordination in such situations, it is important |
| that a CPU which is setting up the cluster can advertise its state |
| independently of the CPU which is tearing down the cluster. For this |
| reason, the cluster state is split into two parts: |
| |
| "cluster" state: The global state of the cluster; or the state |
| on the outbound side: |
| |
| - CLUSTER_DOWN |
| - CLUSTER_UP |
| - CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN |
| |
| "inbound" state: The state of the cluster on the inbound side. |
| |
| - INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP |
| - INBOUND_COMING_UP |
| |
| |
| The different pairings of these states results in six possible |
| states for the cluster as a whole:: |
| |
| CLUSTER_UP |
| +==========> INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP -------------+ |
| # | |
| | |
| CLUSTER_UP <----+ | |
| INBOUND_COMING_UP | v |
| |
| ^ CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN |
| # INBOUND_COMING_UP <=== INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP |
| |
| CLUSTER_DOWN | | |
| INBOUND_COMING_UP <----+ | |
| | |
| ^ | |
| +=========== CLUSTER_DOWN <------------+ |
| INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP |
| |
| Transitions -----> can only be made by the outbound CPU, and |
| only involve changes to the "cluster" state. |
| |
| Transitions ===##> can only be made by the inbound CPU, and only |
| involve changes to the "inbound" state, except where there is no |
| further transition possible on the outbound side (i.e., the |
| outbound CPU has put the cluster into the CLUSTER_DOWN state). |
| |
| The race avoidance algorithm does not provide a way to determine |
| which exact CPUs within the cluster play these roles. This must |
| be decided in advance by some other means. Refer to the section |
| "Last man and first man selection" for more explanation. |
| |
| |
| CLUSTER_DOWN/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP is the only state where the |
| cluster can actually be powered down. |
| |
| The parallelism of the inbound and outbound CPUs is observed by |
| the existence of two different paths from CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN/ |
| INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP (corresponding to GOING_DOWN in the basic |
| model) to CLUSTER_DOWN/INBOUND_COMING_UP (corresponding to |
| COMING_UP in the basic model). The second path avoids cluster |
| teardown completely. |
| |
| CLUSTER_UP/INBOUND_COMING_UP is equivalent to UP in the basic |
| model. The final transition to CLUSTER_UP/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP |
| is trivial and merely resets the state machine ready for the |
| next cycle. |
| |
| Details of the allowable transitions follow. |
| |
| The next state in each case is notated |
| |
| <cluster state>/<inbound state> (<transitioner>) |
| |
| where the <transitioner> is the side on which the transition |
| can occur; either the inbound or the outbound side. |
| |
| |
| CLUSTER_DOWN/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP: |
| Next state: |
| CLUSTER_DOWN/INBOUND_COMING_UP (inbound) |
| Conditions: |
| none |
| |
| Trigger events: |
| a) an explicit hardware power-up operation, resulting |
| from a policy decision on another CPU; |
| |
| b) a hardware event, such as an interrupt. |
| |
| |
| CLUSTER_DOWN/INBOUND_COMING_UP: |
| |
| In this state, an inbound CPU sets up the cluster, including |
| enabling of hardware coherency at the cluster level and any |
| other operations (such as cache invalidation) which are required |
| in order to achieve this. |
| |
| The purpose of this state is to do sufficient cluster-level |
| setup to enable other CPUs in the cluster to enter coherency |
| safely. |
| |
| Next state: |
| CLUSTER_UP/INBOUND_COMING_UP (inbound) |
| Conditions: |
| cluster-level setup and hardware coherency complete |
| Trigger events: |
| (spontaneous) |
| |
| |
| CLUSTER_UP/INBOUND_COMING_UP: |
| |
| Cluster-level setup is complete and hardware coherency is |
| enabled for the cluster. Other CPUs in the cluster can safely |
| enter coherency. |
| |
| This is a transient state, leading immediately to |
| CLUSTER_UP/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP. All other CPUs on the cluster |
| should consider treat these two states as equivalent. |
| |
| Next state: |
| CLUSTER_UP/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP (inbound) |
| Conditions: |
| none |
| Trigger events: |
| (spontaneous) |
| |
| |
| CLUSTER_UP/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP: |
| |
| Cluster-level setup is complete and hardware coherency is |
| enabled for the cluster. Other CPUs in the cluster can safely |
| enter coherency. |
| |
| The cluster will remain in this state until a policy decision is |
| made to power the cluster down. |
| |
| Next state: |
| CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP (outbound) |
| Conditions: |
| none |
| Trigger events: |
| policy decision to power down the cluster |
| |
| |
| CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP: |
| |
| An outbound CPU is tearing the cluster down. The selected CPU |
| must wait in this state until all CPUs in the cluster are in the |
| CPU_DOWN state. |
| |
| When all CPUs are in the CPU_DOWN state, the cluster can be torn |
| down, for example by cleaning data caches and exiting |
| cluster-level coherency. |
| |
| To avoid wasteful unnecessary teardown operations, the outbound |
| should check the inbound cluster state for asynchronous |
| transitions to INBOUND_COMING_UP. Alternatively, individual |
| CPUs can be checked for entry into CPU_COMING_UP or CPU_UP. |
| |
| |
| Next states: |
| |
| CLUSTER_DOWN/INBOUND_NOT_COMING_UP (outbound) |
| Conditions: |
| cluster torn down and ready to power off |
| Trigger events: |
| (spontaneous) |
| |
| CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN/INBOUND_COMING_UP (inbound) |
| Conditions: |
| none |
| |
| Trigger events: |
| a) an explicit hardware power-up operation, |
| resulting from a policy decision on another |
| CPU; |
| |
| b) a hardware event, such as an interrupt. |
| |
| |
| CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN/INBOUND_COMING_UP: |
| |
| The cluster is (or was) being torn down, but another CPU has |
| come online in the meantime and is trying to set up the cluster |
| again. |
| |
| If the outbound CPU observes this state, it has two choices: |
| |
| a) back out of teardown, restoring the cluster to the |
| CLUSTER_UP state; |
| |
| b) finish tearing the cluster down and put the cluster |
| in the CLUSTER_DOWN state; the inbound CPU will |
| set up the cluster again from there. |
| |
| Choice (a) permits the removal of some latency by avoiding |
| unnecessary teardown and setup operations in situations where |
| the cluster is not really going to be powered down. |
| |
| |
| Next states: |
| |
| CLUSTER_UP/INBOUND_COMING_UP (outbound) |
| Conditions: |
| cluster-level setup and hardware |
| coherency complete |
| |
| Trigger events: |
| (spontaneous) |
| |
| CLUSTER_DOWN/INBOUND_COMING_UP (outbound) |
| Conditions: |
| cluster torn down and ready to power off |
| |
| Trigger events: |
| (spontaneous) |
| |
| |
| Last man and First man selection |
| -------------------------------- |
| |
| The CPU which performs cluster tear-down operations on the outbound side |
| is commonly referred to as the "last man". |
| |
| The CPU which performs cluster setup on the inbound side is commonly |
| referred to as the "first man". |
| |
| The race avoidance algorithm documented above does not provide a |
| mechanism to choose which CPUs should play these roles. |
| |
| |
| Last man: |
| |
| When shutting down the cluster, all the CPUs involved are initially |
| executing Linux and hence coherent. Therefore, ordinary spinlocks can |
| be used to select a last man safely, before the CPUs become |
| non-coherent. |
| |
| |
| First man: |
| |
| Because CPUs may power up asynchronously in response to external wake-up |
| events, a dynamic mechanism is needed to make sure that only one CPU |
| attempts to play the first man role and do the cluster-level |
| initialisation: any other CPUs must wait for this to complete before |
| proceeding. |
| |
| Cluster-level initialisation may involve actions such as configuring |
| coherency controls in the bus fabric. |
| |
| The current implementation in mcpm_head.S uses a separate mutual exclusion |
| mechanism to do this arbitration. This mechanism is documented in |
| detail in vlocks.txt. |
| |
| |
| Features and Limitations |
| ------------------------ |
| |
| Implementation: |
| |
| The current ARM-based implementation is split between |
| arch/arm/common/mcpm_head.S (low-level inbound CPU operations) and |
| arch/arm/common/mcpm_entry.c (everything else): |
| |
| __mcpm_cpu_going_down() signals the transition of a CPU to the |
| CPU_GOING_DOWN state. |
| |
| __mcpm_cpu_down() signals the transition of a CPU to the CPU_DOWN |
| state. |
| |
| A CPU transitions to CPU_COMING_UP and then to CPU_UP via the |
| low-level power-up code in mcpm_head.S. This could |
| involve CPU-specific setup code, but in the current |
| implementation it does not. |
| |
| __mcpm_outbound_enter_critical() and __mcpm_outbound_leave_critical() |
| handle transitions from CLUSTER_UP to CLUSTER_GOING_DOWN |
| and from there to CLUSTER_DOWN or back to CLUSTER_UP (in |
| the case of an aborted cluster power-down). |
| |
| These functions are more complex than the __mcpm_cpu_*() |
| functions due to the extra inter-CPU coordination which |
| is needed for safe transitions at the cluster level. |
| |
| A cluster transitions from CLUSTER_DOWN back to CLUSTER_UP via |
| the low-level power-up code in mcpm_head.S. This |
| typically involves platform-specific setup code, |
| provided by the platform-specific power_up_setup |
| function registered via mcpm_sync_init. |
| |
| Deep topologies: |
| |
| As currently described and implemented, the algorithm does not |
| support CPU topologies involving more than two levels (i.e., |
| clusters of clusters are not supported). The algorithm could be |
| extended by replicating the cluster-level states for the |
| additional topological levels, and modifying the transition |
| rules for the intermediate (non-outermost) cluster levels. |
| |
| |
| Colophon |
| -------- |
| |
| Originally created and documented by Dave Martin for Linaro Limited, in |
| collaboration with Nicolas Pitre and Achin Gupta. |
| |
| Copyright (C) 2012-2013 Linaro Limited |
| Distributed under the terms of Version 2 of the GNU General Public |
| License, as defined in linux/COPYING. |