linux内核msleep函数源码,内核msleep()耗时过多优化

高通低端平台启动时间发现有个地方耗时达2.5s，Linux内核版本3.18，具体是msm camera driver里使用了如下code:for(i=0;i<128;i++)

{

do_something();

msleep(delay);

do_something();

}

增加log，delay是1ms，从log看实际延时多达20ms，整个循环下来达2.5s，如何达到预期的延时呢。

来看下内核文档Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt关于延时的描述:ATOMIC CONTEXT:You must use the *delay family of functions. These

functions use the jiffie estimation of clock speed

and will busy wait for enough loop cycles to achieve

the desired delay:

ndelay(unsigned long nsecs)

udelay(unsigned long usecs)

mdelay(unsigned long msecs)

udelay is the generally preferred API; ndelay-level

precision may not actually exist on many non-PC devices.

mdelay is macro wrapper around udelay, to account for

possible overflow when passing large arguments to udelay.

In general, use of mdelay is discouraged and code should

be refactored to allow for the use of msleep.

原子操作内延时必须用*delay系列忙等函数，我们来看下udelay的实现include/asm-generic/delay.h：#define udelay(n) \

({ \

if (__builtin_constant_p(n)) { \

if ((n) / 20000 >= 1) \

__bad_udelay(); \

else \

__const_udelay((n) * 0x10c7ul); \

} else { \

__udelay(n); \

} \

})

__bad_udelay()范围出错，__udelay()和__const_udelay()都依赖于硬件架构，比如ARM在arch/arm/include/asm/delay.h:#define __udelay(n) arm_delay_ops.udelay(n)

#define __const_udelay(n) arm_delay_ops.const_udelay(n)

最后会call:#if __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ == 6 || defined(CONFIG_ARM_ERRATA_754327)

#define cpu_relax() smp_mb()

#else

#define cpu_relax() barrier()

#endif

static void __timer_delay(unsigned long cycles)

{

cycles_t start = get_cycles();

while ((get_cycles() - start) < cycles)

cpu_relax();

}

barrier()是啥，内核文档Documentation/memory-barriers.txt说明：=========================

WHAT ARE MEMORY BARRIERS?

As can be seen above, independent memory operations are effectively performed

in random order, but this can be a problem for CPU-CPU interaction and for I/O.

What is required is some way of intervening to instruct the compiler and the

CPU to restrict the order.

Memory barriers are such interventions. They impose a perceived partial

ordering over the memory operations on either side of the barrier.

Such enforcement is important because the CPUs and other devices in a system

can use a variety of tricks to improve performance, including reordering,

deferral and combination of memory operations; speculative loads; speculative

branch prediction and various types of caching. Memory barriers are used to

override or suppress these tricks, allowing the code to sanely control the

interaction of multiple CPUs and/or devices.

barrier就是强制memory operations的唯一有序性，rt? 具体以后再看。NON-ATOMIC CONTEXT:You should use the *sleep[_range] family of functions.

There are a few more options here, while any of them may

work correctly, using the "right" sleep function will

help the scheduler, power management, and just make your

driver better :)

-- Backed by busy-wait loop:

udelay(unsigned long usecs)

-- Backed by hrtimers:

usleep_range(unsigned long min, unsigned long max)

-- Backed by jiffies / legacy_timers

msleep(unsigned long msecs)

msleep_interruptible(unsigned long msecs)

Unlike the *delay family, the underlying mechanism

driving each of these calls varies, thus there are

quirks you should be aware of.

非原子操作内使用*sleep[_range]函数，用的不好就会带来性能问题，具体是注意一些quirks，来看看是哪些：SLEEPING FOR "A FEW" USECS ( < ~10us? ):

* Use udelay

- Why not usleep?

On slower systems, (embedded, OR perhaps a speed-

stepped PC!) the overhead of setting up the hrtimers

for usleep *may* not be worth it. Such an evaluation

will obviously depend on your specific situation, but

it is something to be aware of.

< ~10us的也用udelay，不用hrtimers实现的usleep担心开销太大。what is hrtimers? see Documentation/timers/hrtimers.txt:subsystem for high-resolution kernel timers

高精定时器，肯定准哈。SLEEPING FOR ~USECS OR SMALL MSECS ( 10us - 20ms):

* Use usleep_range

- Why not msleep for (1ms - 20ms)?

Explained originally here:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/3/250

msleep(1~20) may not do what the caller intends, and

will often sleep longer (~20 ms actual sleep for any

value given in the 1~20ms range). In many cases this

is not the desired behavior.

- Why is there no "usleep" / What is a good range?

Since usleep_range is built on top of hrtimers, the

wakeup will be very precise (ish), thus a simple

usleep function would likely introduce a large number

of undesired interrupts.

With the introduction of a range, the scheduler is

free to coalesce your wakeup with any other wakeup

that may have happened for other reasons, or at the

worst case, fire an interrupt for your upper bound.

The larger a range you supply, the greater a chance

that you will not trigger an interrupt; this should

be balanced with what is an acceptable upper bound on

delay / performance for your specific code path. Exact

tolerances here are very situation specific, thus it

is left to the caller to determine a reasonable range.

对10us - 20ms的使用usleep_range，那我们这里是delay 1ms，不应该使用msleep，原因上面说的很清楚了就是会sleep longer，应该用usleep_range，为啥要加range？没有range会带来很多中断？具体range和你的caller有关。SLEEPING FOR LARGER MSECS ( 10ms+ )

* Use msleep or possibly msleep_interruptible

- What's the difference?

msleep sets the current task to TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE

whereas msleep_interruptible sets the current task to

TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE before scheduling the sleep. In

short, the difference is whether the sleep can be ended

early by a signal. In general, just use msleep unless

you know you have a need for the interruptible variant

对应延时10ms+的使用msleep or msleep_interruptible。

那这里的range写多少了，我想这个问题内核drv肯定也有人遇到过，果然这个patch就是优化这类耗时：Date Tue, 29 Nov 2016 07:51:55 +0100

From Vojtech Pavlik <>

Subject Re: [PATCH] Input: joystick: gf2k - change msleep to usleep_range for small msecs

share 0

share 0

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 01:11:49AM +0530, Aniroop Mathur wrote:

> msleep(1~20) may not do what the caller intends, and will often sleep longer.

> (~20 ms actual sleep for any value given in the 1~20ms range)

> This is not the desired behaviour for many cases like device resume time,

> device suspend time, device enable time, connection time, probe time,

> loops, retry logic, etc

> msleep is built on jiffies / legacy timers which are not precise whereas

> usleep_range is build on top of hrtimers so the wakeups are precise.

> Thus, change msleep to usleep_range for precise wakeups.

>

> For example:

> On a machine with tick rate / HZ as 100, msleep(4) will make the process to

> sleep for a minimum period of 10 ms whereas usleep_range(4000, 4100) will make

> sure that the process does not sleep for more than 4100 us or 4.1ms

And once more, patch not needed.

>

> Signed-off-by: Aniroop Mathur

> ---

> drivers/input/joystick/gf2k.c | 8 ++++----

> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

>

> diff --git a/drivers/input/joystick/gf2k.c b/drivers/input/joystick/gf2k.c

msleep(delay)改成usleep_range(delay*1000, delay*1000 + 100)，试了下，果然精确延时，节省了2.5s：]