Adding upstream version 6.1.76.upstream/6.1.76upstream

Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org>

1 files changed, 533 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/arm/cluster-pm-race-avoidance.rst b/Documentation/arm/cluster-pm-race-avoidance.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..aa58603d3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/arm/cluster-pm-race-avoidance.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,533 @@
+=========================================================
+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.