From: Wallak <wallak@free.fr>
To: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, lenb <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ACPI "_PDC" - acpi_processor_set_pdc()- execution regression - Linux-3.x
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:59:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EE6792A.8070901@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1323657511.17515.11.camel@minggr>
Hi Lin Ming,
This last patch, modifying the behavior of acpi_get_cpuid(), works fine
on my non SMP enabled kernel. The test was done on a Dell X300,
acpi_processor_set_pdc() was properly called, without the changes done
by my previous patch.
Best Regards,
Wallak.
Lin Ming wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 10:26 +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From:<wallak@free.fr>
>> Date: Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:38 AM
>> Subject: ACPI "_PDC" - acpi_processor_set_pdc()- execution regression
>> - Linux-3.x
>> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>
>>
>> We have a regression on the ACPI stack of the last linux kernel line 3.x (3.1.4,
>> 3.2-rc4...). The ACPI "_PDC" chunk is not executed on some computers (e.g. Dell
>> X300; the function acpi_processor_set_pdc() is not called). This issue yield to
>> an uninitialized state of some ACPI variables.
>>
>> A patch is available below. This patch come back to the previous linux behavior,
>> and works fine.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Wallak.
>>
>> --- linux-3.1.4-mdf/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c.orig 2011-12-07
>> 23:12:57.000000000 +0100
>> +++ linux-3.1.4-mdf/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c 2011-12-07
>> 23:13:39.000000000 +0100
>> @@ -223,8 +223,8 @@
>> type = (acpi_type == ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE) ? 1 : 0;
>> cpuid = acpi_get_cpuid(handle, type, acpi_id);
>>
>> - if (cpuid == -1)
>> - return false;
>> + if ((cpuid == -1)&& (num_possible_cpus()> 1))
> Hi Wallak,
>
> BIOS may define multiple CPU handles even for UP
> processor(see below).
>
> processor_physically_present(acpi_handle handle) will be called for each
> CPU handles.
>
> We should only return valid value for CPU0 on UP processor.
> With your patch, processor_physically_present will return true for all
> CPU handles(CPU0, CPU1, CPU2, CPU3). This is not we want.
>
> I think below is the correct fix.
> Could you help to test it?
>
> Thanks.
>
> > From 5c6de7311ced7a1febf85fdcc08b6116bcfe8138 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Lin Ming<ming.m.lin@intel.com>
> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:04:53 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] ACPI: processor: fix acpi_get_cpuid for UP processor
>
> For UP processor, it is likely that no _MAT method or MADT table defined.
> So currently acpi_get_cpuid(...) always return -1 for UP processor.
> This is wrong. It should return valid value for CPU0.
>
> In the other hand, BIOS may define multiple CPU handles even for UP
> processor, for example
>
> Scope (_PR)
> {
> Processor (CPU0, 0x00, 0x00000410, 0x06) {}
> Processor (CPU1, 0x01, 0x00000410, 0x06) {}
> Processor (CPU2, 0x02, 0x00000410, 0x06) {}
> Processor (CPU3, 0x03, 0x00000410, 0x06) {}
> }
>
> We should only return valid value for CPU0's acpi handle.
> And return invalid value for others.
>
> http://marc.info/?t=132329819900003&r=1&w=2
>
> Reported-by: wallak@free.fr
> Signed-off-by: Lin Ming<ming.m.lin@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> index 3a0428e..3372900 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> @@ -173,8 +173,30 @@ int acpi_get_cpuid(acpi_handle handle, int type, u32 acpi_id)
> apic_id = map_mat_entry(handle, type, acpi_id);
> if (apic_id == -1)
> apic_id = map_madt_entry(type, acpi_id);
> - if (apic_id == -1)
> - return apic_id;
> + if (apic_id == -1) {
> + /*
> + * On UP processor, there is no _MAT or MADT table.
> + * So above apic_id is always set to -1.
> + *
> + * BIOS may define multiple CPU handles even for UP processor.
> + * For example,
> + *
> + * Scope (_PR)
> + * {
> + * Processor (CPU0, 0x00, 0x00000410, 0x06) {}
> + * Processor (CPU1, 0x01, 0x00000410, 0x06) {}
> + * Processor (CPU2, 0x02, 0x00000410, 0x06) {}
> + * Processor (CPU3, 0x03, 0x00000410, 0x06) {}
> + * }
> + *
> + * Ignores apic_id and always return 0 for CPU0's handle.
> + * Return -1 for other CPU's handle.
> + */
> + if (acpi_id == 0)
> + return acpi_id;
> + else
> + return apic_id;
> + }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-12 22:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1323297487.4edfeacfc49ff@imp.free.fr>
2011-12-08 5:01 ` ACPI "_PDC" - acpi_processor_set_pdc()- execution regression - Linux-3.x Bjorn Helgaas
2011-12-08 7:40 ` Lin Ming
[not found] ` <CAF1ivSZX37HRyxJX_rdkZ4pVrxjCZeM39mAs4ZKcqWCYShxaxQ@mail.gmail.com>
2011-12-12 2:38 ` Lin Ming
2011-12-12 21:59 ` Wallak [this message]
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=4EE6792A.8070901@free.fr \
--to=wallak@free.fr \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
/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 NNTP newsgroup(s).