|  | ========================================================= | 
|  | 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. |