Re: [PATCH v1] sched: idle: Consolidate the handling of two special cases

From: Aboorva Devarajan

Date: Mon Mar 16 2026 - 03:55:23 EST


On Fri, 2026-03-13 at 13:25 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> There are two special cases in the idle loop that are handled
> inconsistently even though they are analogous.
>
> The first one is when a cpuidle driver is absent and the default CPU
> idle time power management implemented by the architecture code is used.
> In that case, the scheduler tick is stopped every time before invoking
> default_idle_call().
>
> The second one is when a cpuidle driver is present, but there is only
> one idle state in its table.  In that case, the scheduler tick is never
> stopped.
>
> Since each of these approaches leads to suboptimal choices in some
> cases, reconcile them with the help of one simple heuristic.  Namely,
> stop the tick if the CPU has been woken up by it in the previous
> iteration of the idle loop, or let it tick otherwise.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Based on today's mainline.
>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/idle.c |   30 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> @@ -161,6 +161,14 @@ static int call_cpuidle(struct cpuidle_d
>   return cpuidle_enter(drv, dev, next_state);
>  }
>  
> +static void idle_call_stop_or_retain_tick(bool stop_tick)
> +{
> + if (stop_tick || tick_nohz_tick_stopped())
> + tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick();
> + else
> + tick_nohz_idle_retain_tick();
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * cpuidle_idle_call - the main idle function
>   *
> @@ -170,7 +178,7 @@ static int call_cpuidle(struct cpuidle_d
>   * set, and it returns with polling set.  If it ever stops polling, it
>   * must clear the polling bit.
>   */
> -static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
> +static void cpuidle_idle_call(bool stop_tick)
>  {
>   struct cpuidle_device *dev = cpuidle_get_device();
>   struct cpuidle_driver *drv = cpuidle_get_cpu_driver(dev);
> @@ -186,7 +194,7 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>   }
>  
>   if (cpuidle_not_available(drv, dev)) {
> - tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick();
> + idle_call_stop_or_retain_tick(stop_tick);
>  
>   default_idle_call();
>   goto exit_idle;
> @@ -222,17 +230,19 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>   next_state = cpuidle_find_deepest_state(drv, dev, max_latency_ns);
>   call_cpuidle(drv, dev, next_state);
>   } else if (drv->state_count > 1) {
> - bool stop_tick = true;
> + /*
> + * stop_tick is expected to be true by default by cpuidle
> + * governors, which allows them to select idle states with
> + * target residency above the tick period length.
> + */
> + stop_tick = true;
>  
>   /*
>   * Ask the cpuidle framework to choose a convenient idle state.
>   */
>   next_state = cpuidle_select(drv, dev, &stop_tick);
>  
> - if (stop_tick || tick_nohz_tick_stopped())
> - tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick();
> - else
> - tick_nohz_idle_retain_tick();
> + idle_call_stop_or_retain_tick(stop_tick);
>  
>   entered_state = call_cpuidle(drv, dev, next_state);
>   /*
> @@ -240,7 +250,7 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>   */
>   cpuidle_reflect(dev, entered_state);
>   } else {
> - tick_nohz_idle_retain_tick();
> + idle_call_stop_or_retain_tick(stop_tick);
>  
>   /*
>   * If there is only a single idle state (or none), there is
> @@ -268,6 +278,7 @@ exit_idle:
>  static void do_idle(void)
>  {
>   int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + bool got_tick = false;
>  
>   /*
>   * Check if we need to update blocked load
> @@ -338,8 +349,9 @@ static void do_idle(void)
>   tick_nohz_idle_restart_tick();
>   cpu_idle_poll();
>   } else {
> - cpuidle_idle_call();
> + cpuidle_idle_call(got_tick);
>   }
> + got_tick = tick_nohz_idle_got_tick();
>   arch_cpu_idle_exit();
>   }
>  
>

This unifies the special-case tick handling with a heuristic,
affecting only the no-driver and single-state paths while leaving the
common multi-state governor path behaviorally unchanged.

So,

Reviewed-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks,
Aboorva