All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* AW: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: No C-States any longer...
@ 2011-06-15  9:03 Carsten Schiers
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Carsten Schiers @ 2011-06-15  9:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tian, Kevin, Ian Campbell; +Cc: xen-devel, Yu, Ke

Thanks for your support. 

So the plan is to run the very kernel (2.6.32.40 from Jeremy's git) natively, without Xen, and check 
what acpi.debug and my printks are reporting?

Would the other check be to change pr_id from -1 to 0 by some helper code in the right place?

Have I correctly understood that my BIOS seems to implement C-States through FADT instead of _CST, 
which is ok generally, but the FADT PBLK is not correctly set (maybe because it worries about the -1)?

By the way: 

  - I dom0_vcpus_pin and restrict Dom0 to only use one vcpu in xend-config.sxp
  - I used Xen/Debian Squeeze PVOPS Xen Kernel on the Intel Box
  - The same combo fails on the AMD box, latest PVOPS, too. Further testing done with latest PVOPS.

Everything used to work with Xen / 2.6.18 Dom0 Kernel, but I cannot check that, because it will not 
boot any longer, because it doesn't find the root system. I currently concentrate on the C-State 
issue.

Carsten.


----- Originalnachricht -----
Von: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Gesendet: Mit, 15.6.2011 10:39
An: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: Carsten Schiers <carsten@schiers.de> ; "Yu, Ke" <ke.yu@intel.com> ; xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Betreff: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: [Xen-devel] No C-States any longer...

> From: Ian Campbell [mailto:Ian.Campbell@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 4:35 PM
> 
> On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 09:11 +0100, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > From: Carsten Schiers [mailto:carsten@schiers.de]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 4:27 AM
> > >
> > > One step further: the problem is that pr->pblk is not set, thus
> > > acpi_processor_get_power_info_fadt fails.
> > > Knowing this, I found an error in the ACPI_DEBUG output that
> > > corresponds:
> > >
> > > [   17.062739] processor_xen-0222 [00] xen_acpi_processor_get:
> Processor
> > > [-1:0]
> > > [   17.062902] processor_xen-0225 [00] xen_acpi_processor_get: No PBLK
> > > (NULL address)
> >
> > this looks a bit strange. how about the native log?
> >
> > >
> > > It does this for all processors. pr_id is always -1, pr->acpi_id
> > > counting up from 0 to 2.
> >
> > what's your dom0 vcpu number? and how about physical cpu?
> 
> Wasn't there some oddity in the Xen ACPI PM support due to the
> disconnect between VCPU and PCPU? I thought it resulted in some CPU id
> or other being reported back as -1, in much this manner.

yes, the existing tricky changes are mostly used to tackle this disconnection.

> 
> There's some tweaking of this stuff in e.g.
> xen_acpi_processor_get_power_info(). But equally
> xen_acpi_processor_get_info() has a bunch of cases for the != -1 case.
> 
> Does the dom0_vcpus_pin hypervisor option workaround this sort of thing?

We don't want to add that limitation to have dom0 vcpu number same as 
physical cpu number to use PM features. But yes Carsten can try use
same number to see whether it works for him. If it works, then there's other
corner cases we didn't capture. But since this works on his Intel box, which
I guess same configuration is used, I'd think it may come from some oddity
in AMD box's ACPI table which is not well handled by either common ACPI
code or Xen specific stubs.

Thanks
Kevin

> 
> This changeset refers to the -1 too:
> 
> commit 68320323a51c2378aca433c76157d9e66104ff1e
> Author: Jiang, Yunhong <yunhong.jiang@intel.com>
> Date:   Tue Sep 14 14:41:52 2010 -0700
> 
>     xen/acpi: Add cpu hotplug support
> 
>     Add physical CPU hotplug support to origin/xen/next-2.6.32 branch.
>     Please notice that, even with this change, the acpi_processor->id is
>     still always -1. This is because several workaround in PM side depends
>     on acpi_processor->id == -1. As the CPU hotplug logic does not depends
>     on acpi_processor->id, I'd still keep it no changes.
> 
>     But we need change the acpi_processor->id in the future.
> 
>     Signed-off-by: Jiang, Yunhong <yunhong.jiang@intel.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>
> 
> Ian.
> 
> > > Any help is welcome, but I will analyze further...
> >
> > Current Dom0 depends on several Xen specific functions like
> xen_acpi_get_power_info
> > you mentioned earlier, which is a copy from native acpi_get_power_info with
> xen
> > specific tweaks added. there's possibility that in your environment general
> ACPI code
> > is changed which is not reflected in Xen specific versions.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Kevin
> >
> > >
> > > Carsten.
> > >
> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: Carsten Schiers
> > > Gesendet: Montag, 13. Juni 2011 15:22
> > > An: ke.yu; kevin.tian
> > > Cc: xen-devel
> > > Betreff: AW: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: [Xen-devel] No C-States any longer...
> > >
> > > >>I will try to boot native Linux in order to verify 100%
> > > >> that the tables
> > > >> are there.
> > > >
> > > >yes, that's interesting data to compare.
> > >
> > > I have booted with a Live Linux and dumped acpi tables. Those are 100%
> > > identical with those
> > > I received from Dom0. I will now start looking into
> > > acpi_processor_get_power_info_fadt And
> > > check, why it is returning -ENODEV.
> > >
> > > Carsten.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Xen-devel mailing list
> > > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* AW: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: No C-States any longer...
@ 2011-06-15  9:12 Carsten Schiers
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Carsten Schiers @ 2011-06-15  9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tian, Kevin, Yu, Ke; +Cc: xen-devel

> this looks a bit strange. how about the native log?

I have not done a log with ACPI_DEBUG enabled. Will do so tonight or tomorrow night.

> what's your dom0 vcpu number? and how about physical cpu?

dom0_vcpu_pin/xend-config.sxp result in the following excerpt of xm vcpu-list:

  Name          ID          VCPU          CPU           State          ...
  Domain-0      0           0             0             r--            ...

  Domain-0      0           1             -             --p            ...

  Domain-0      0           2             -             --p            ...
  ...

> there's possibility that in your environment general ACPI code
> is changed which is not reflected in Xen specific versions. 

I have not understood that.

Thanks,
Carsten.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: No C-States any longer...
  2011-06-15  9:03 Carsten Schiers
@ 2011-06-15 13:06 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
  2011-06-15 13:17 ` AW: " Carsten Schiers
  -1 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk @ 2011-06-15 13:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Carsten Schiers; +Cc: Tian, Kevin, xen-devel, Ian Campbell, Yu, Ke

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:03:58AM +0200, Carsten Schiers wrote:
> Thanks for your support. 
> 
> So the plan is to run the very kernel (2.6.32.40 from Jeremy's git) natively, without Xen, and check 
> what acpi.debug and my printks are reporting?
> 
> Would the other check be to change pr_id from -1 to 0 by some helper code in the right place?
> 
> Have I correctly understood that my BIOS seems to implement C-States through FADT instead of _CST, 
> which is ok generally, but the FADT PBLK is not correctly set (maybe because it worries about the -1)?

So the FADT PBLK is about this line:
            Processor (CP00, 0x10, 0x00000410, 0x06)

in your DSDT. The 0x0000410 is the PBLK and somehow it is NULL on your box. You could
run iasl -d on the DSDT to find out what exactly is there.

But I *think* that should not affect the C-states as it is just used for reserving some
CardBus regions.

> 
> By the way: 
> 
>   - I dom0_vcpus_pin and restrict Dom0 to only use one vcpu in xend-config.sxp
>   - I used Xen/Debian Squeeze PVOPS Xen Kernel on the Intel Box
>   - The same combo fails on the AMD box, latest PVOPS, too. Further testing done with latest PVOPS.

So just so that you don't lose heart - the C states do work on my AMD box.

Interstingly the _PSS states are being reported as non-existent - but on baremetal
they seem to exist.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* AW: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: No C-States any longer...
@ 2011-06-16  6:22 Carsten Schiers
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Carsten Schiers @ 2011-06-16  6:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tian, Kevin, mark.langsdorf; +Cc: xen-devel, Ian Campbell, Yu, Ke

>In your case there's no _CST found, and then no PBLK found. 

The only thing that are giveing me hope are:

  - it worked once (Xenified 2.6.18.8)
  - FADT contains C2/C3 Latency information (_CST Support is 00 BTW)

>do you mean the latest PVOPS from Konzad? I don't think Cstate/Pstate patches
>have been carried there, which still stay in Jeremy's tree.

Currently I tried with stable 2.6.32.x from Jeremy and Debian Squeeze, as Konrad
said, his 2.6.39.x would expose C-States for him, what did not before, I will try
his 2.6.39.x next. I can check this and native boot results tonight.

>Since this is the AMD box which I'm not familiar with, also CC Mark here who is
>the owner for power management on AMD boxes.

Mark, I realy hope you have an idea. This is - by the way - the X3 400e I just bought
because I never succeeded in getting TSC hickup-free >2.6.18 systems with my 4050e, 
you eventually remember...?

Carsten.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-06-16  6:22 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <33AB447FBD802F4E932063B962385B3554AE42D9@shsmsx501.ccr.corp.intel.com>
2011-06-11  9:25 ` AW: RE: RE: RE: RE: No C-States any longer Carsten Schiers
2011-06-12  9:01   ` Tian, Kevin
2011-06-13 13:21     ` AW: " Carsten Schiers
2011-06-13 20:27       ` Carsten Schiers
2011-06-15  8:11         ` Tian, Kevin
2011-06-15  8:34           ` Ian Campbell
2011-06-15  8:39             ` Tian, Kevin
2011-06-15  8:15       ` Tian, Kevin
2011-06-15  9:14         ` AW: " Carsten Schiers
2011-06-15  9:03 Carsten Schiers
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-06-15  9:12 Carsten Schiers
2011-06-15 13:06 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2011-06-15 13:17 ` AW: " Carsten Schiers
2011-06-16  6:22 Carsten Schiers

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.