From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/cpufreq: Don't enable generic lock debugging options
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2023 09:15:40 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230607034540.ldjugl3g6ryyyi5q@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230605-kselftest-cpufreq-options-v1-1-d4621e0c7cbe@kernel.org>
On 06-06-23, 15:11, Mark Brown wrote:
> Currently the the config fragment for cpufreq enables a lot of generic
> lock debugging. While these options are useful when testing cpufreq
> they aren't actually required to run the tests and are therefore out of
> scope for the cpufreq fragement, they are more of a thing that it's good
> to enable while doing testing than an actual requirement for cpufreq
> testing specifically. Having these debugging options enabled,
> especially the mutex and spinlock instrumentation, mean that any build
> that includes the cpufreq fragment is both very much larger than a
> standard defconfig (eg, I'm seeing 35% on x86_64) and also slower at
> runtime.
>
> This is causing real problems for CI systems. In order to avoid
> building large numbers of kernels they try to group kselftest fragments
> together, frequently just grouping all the kselftest fragments into a
> single block. The increased size is an issue for memory constrained
> systems and is also problematic for systems with fixed storage
> allocations for kernel images (eg, typical u-boot systems) where it
> frequently causes the kernel to overflow the storage space allocated for
> kernels. The reduced performance isn't too bad with real hardware but
> can be disruptive on emulated platforms.
>
> In order to avoid these issues remove these generic instrumentation
> options from the cpufreq fragment, bringing the cpufreq fragment into
> line with other fragments which generally set requirements for testing
> rather than nice to haves.
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/cpufreq/config | 8 --------
> 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cpufreq/config b/tools/testing/selftests/cpufreq/config
> index 75e900793e8a..ce5068f5a6a2 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/cpufreq/config
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cpufreq/config
> @@ -5,11 +5,3 @@ CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_USERSPACE=y
> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND=y
> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_CONSERVATIVE=y
> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_SCHEDUTIL=y
> -CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES=y
> -CONFIG_DEBUG_PLIST=y
> -CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK=y
> -CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES=y
> -CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC=y
> -CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y
> -CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y
> -CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP=y
FWIW, I enabled these earlier as cpufreq core had a history of races
that are normally not caught without these enabled. But I think we
have come a long way from that and these can be removed now.
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-07 3:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-06 14:11 [PATCH] selftests/cpufreq: Don't enable generic lock debugging options Mark Brown
2023-06-07 3:45 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2023-06-09 18:52 ` Shuah Khan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230607034540.ldjugl3g6ryyyi5q@vireshk-i7 \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).