"Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

"Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

[Hans de Goede]

Hi Rafael, Mario,

Commit 2ca8e6285250 ("Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the
_OSC regardless of the query flag"") is causing the issues fixed
by the reverted commit to show up again, see:

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213023
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1963717

both of which have comments from the reporters that
the error message is back again; and presumably also
that /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc is missing
again.

Can you please take a look and see if we can come up with
something which fixes both the re-surfaced issue, as well
as the issue which the revert tries to address ?

Regards,

Hans

Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

[Mario Limonciello]

On 6/23/22 05:06, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi Rafael, Mario,
> 
> Commit 2ca8e6285250 ("Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the
> _OSC regardless of the query flag"") is causing the issues fixed
> by the reverted commit to show up again, see:
> 
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D213023&data=05%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cf3e0e967549b44bfc78e08da550012c9%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915756056744972%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y0NhQJHeimPYw675CW2hxF9BHc102X8Kl9iQRC5tmyk%3D&reserved=0
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D1963717&data=05%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cf3e0e967549b44bfc78e08da550012c9%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915756056744972%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y02ntSQcVqhiqbVGsxys0BSeiv7BmxIRZIoxzdMHxKI%3D&reserved=0
> 
> both of which have comments from the reporters that
> the error message is back again; and presumably also
> that /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc is missing
> again.
> 
> Can you please take a look and see if we can come up with
> something which fixes both the re-surfaced issue, as well
> as the issue which the revert tries to address ?
> 


Is it possible that c42fa24b44751c62c86e98430ef915c0609a2ab8 didn't 
backport to the stable trees it popped back up again?

Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 07:24:34AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On 6/23/22 05:06, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > Hi Rafael, Mario,
> > 
> > Commit 2ca8e6285250 ("Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the
> > _OSC regardless of the query flag"") is causing the issues fixed
> > by the reverted commit to show up again, see:
> > 
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D213023&data=05%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cf3e0e967549b44bfc78e08da550012c9%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915756056744972%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y0NhQJHeimPYw675CW2hxF9BHc102X8Kl9iQRC5tmyk%3D&reserved=0
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D1963717&data=05%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cf3e0e967549b44bfc78e08da550012c9%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915756056744972%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y02ntSQcVqhiqbVGsxys0BSeiv7BmxIRZIoxzdMHxKI%3D&reserved=0
> > 
> > both of which have comments from the reporters that
> > the error message is back again; and presumably also
> > that /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc is missing
> > again.
> > 
> > Can you please take a look and see if we can come up with
> > something which fixes both the re-surfaced issue, as well
> > as the issue which the revert tries to address ?
> > 
> 
> 
> Is it possible that c42fa24b44751c62c86e98430ef915c0609a2ab8 didn't backport
> to the stable trees it popped back up again?
> 

It is only in 5.18, no stable releases that I can see.

RE: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

[Limonciello, Mario]

[Public]



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 08:34
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>
> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Rafael J . Wysocki
> <rjw@rjwysocki.net>; linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>;
> regressions@lists.linux.dev; Thorsten Leemhuis (regressions address)
> <regressions@leemhuis.info>
> Subject: Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless
> of the query flag"" is causing regressions
> 
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 07:24:34AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > On 6/23/22 05:06, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > Hi Rafael, Mario,
> > >
> > > Commit 2ca8e6285250 ("Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the
> > > _OSC regardless of the query flag"") is causing the issues fixed
> > > by the reverted commit to show up again, see:
> > >
> > >
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> illa.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D213023&amp;data=05%7C01%7Cm
> ario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C3d
> d8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7CU
> nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI
> 6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=KxmNvCfdm
> qvk5gXteXUDXHVTK45yEt%2BUYO4vaBbLXis%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > >
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> illa.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D1963717&amp;data=05%7C01%7C
> mario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C
> 3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7
> CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJ
> BTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=pZRqAG3
> %2Bg0QevLOGZ8m9PNxcmkmh58soT2dSLg%2B6qWc%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > >
> > > both of which have comments from the reporters that
> > > the error message is back again; and presumably also
> > > that /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc is missing
> > > again.
> > >
> > > Can you please take a look and see if we can come up with
> > > something which fixes both the re-surfaced issue, as well
> > > as the issue which the revert tries to address ?
> > >
> >
> >
> > Is it possible that c42fa24b44751c62c86e98430ef915c0609a2ab8 didn't
> backport
> > to the stable trees it popped back up again?
> >
> 
> It is only in 5.18, no stable releases that I can see.

I think that should probably come back to stable along with everything this
revert went back to, but before doing that perhaps we can get someone
affected to confirm cherry-picking it helps.

RE: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

[Limonciello, Mario]

[Public]

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 08:34
> > To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>
> > Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Rafael J . Wysocki
> > <rjw@rjwysocki.net>; linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>;
> > regressions@lists.linux.dev; Thorsten Leemhuis (regressions address)
> > <regressions@leemhuis.info>
> > Subject: Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless
> > of the query flag"" is causing regressions
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 07:24:34AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > > On 6/23/22 05:06, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > > Hi Rafael, Mario,
> > > >
> > > > Commit 2ca8e6285250 ("Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the
> > > > _OSC regardless of the query flag"") is causing the issues fixed
> > > > by the reverted commit to show up again, see:
> > > >
> > > >
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> > illa.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D213023&amp;data=05%7C01%7Cm
> >
> ario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C3d
> >
> d8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7CU
> > nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI
> > 6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=KxmNvCfdm
> > qvk5gXteXUDXHVTK45yEt%2BUYO4vaBbLXis%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > >
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> > illa.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D1963717&amp;data=05%7C01%7C
> >
> mario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C
> >
> 3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7
> > CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJ
> > BTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=pZRqAG3
> > %2Bg0QevLOGZ8m9PNxcmkmh58soT2dSLg%2B6qWc%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > both of which have comments from the reporters that
> > > > the error message is back again; and presumably also
> > > > that /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc is missing
> > > > again.
> > > >
> > > > Can you please take a look and see if we can come up with
> > > > something which fixes both the re-surfaced issue, as well
> > > > as the issue which the revert tries to address ?
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Is it possible that c42fa24b44751c62c86e98430ef915c0609a2ab8 didn't
> > backport
> > > to the stable trees it popped back up again?
> > >
> >
> > It is only in 5.18, no stable releases that I can see.
> 
> I think that should probably come back to stable along with everything this
> revert went back to, but before doing that perhaps we can get someone
> affected to confirm cherry-picking it helps.

Users have reported to the Kernel Bugzilla that just picking that patch didn't
help.  At it's core it "seems" to me the firmware masks CPPC support in the _OSC
and previously that was actually ignored.  Since the final SSDT with the PR0._CPC
is loaded dynamically based on whether CPPC was supported this runtime error
happens.

As multiple people have been duplicated into that bug let's work through some
ideas on it there.  To start out I've left a suggestion in there for users to have a
try with.

Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 10:12 PM Limonciello, Mario
<Mario.Limonciello@amd.com> wrote:
>
> [Public]
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 08:34
> > > To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>
> > > Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Rafael J . Wysocki
> > > <rjw@rjwysocki.net>; linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>;
> > > regressions@lists.linux.dev; Thorsten Leemhuis (regressions address)
> > > <regressions@leemhuis.info>
> > > Subject: Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless
> > > of the query flag"" is causing regressions
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 07:24:34AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > > > On 6/23/22 05:06, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > > > Hi Rafael, Mario,
> > > > >
> > > > > Commit 2ca8e6285250 ("Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the
> > > > > _OSC regardless of the query flag"") is causing the issues fixed
> > > > > by the reverted commit to show up again, see:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> > > illa.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D213023&amp;data=05%7C01%7Cm
> > >
> > ario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C3d
> > >
> > d8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7CU
> > > nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI
> > > 6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=KxmNvCfdm
> > > qvk5gXteXUDXHVTK45yEt%2BUYO4vaBbLXis%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > > >
> > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> > > illa.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D1963717&amp;data=05%7C01%7C
> > >
> > mario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C
> > >
> > 3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7
> > > CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJ
> > > BTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=pZRqAG3
> > > %2Bg0QevLOGZ8m9PNxcmkmh58soT2dSLg%2B6qWc%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > > >
> > > > > both of which have comments from the reporters that
> > > > > the error message is back again; and presumably also
> > > > > that /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc is missing
> > > > > again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you please take a look and see if we can come up with
> > > > > something which fixes both the re-surfaced issue, as well
> > > > > as the issue which the revert tries to address ?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Is it possible that c42fa24b44751c62c86e98430ef915c0609a2ab8 didn't
> > > backport
> > > > to the stable trees it popped back up again?
> > > >
> > >
> > > It is only in 5.18, no stable releases that I can see.
> >
> > I think that should probably come back to stable along with everything this
> > revert went back to, but before doing that perhaps we can get someone
> > affected to confirm cherry-picking it helps.
>
> Users have reported to the Kernel Bugzilla that just picking that patch didn't
> help.  At it's core it "seems" to me the firmware masks CPPC support in the _OSC
> and previously that was actually ignored.  Since the final SSDT with the PR0._CPC
> is loaded dynamically based on whether CPPC was supported this runtime error
> happens.
>
> As multiple people have been duplicated into that bug let's work through some
> ideas on it there.  To start out I've left a suggestion in there for users to have a
> try with.

Honestly, at this point I'm inclined to revert the commit in question.

RE: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

[Limonciello, Mario]

[Public]



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 06:40
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>
> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Rafael J . Wysocki
> <rjw@rjwysocki.net>; linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>;
> regressions@lists.linux.dev; Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>;
> rui.zhang@intel.com
> Subject: Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless
> of the query flag"" is causing regressions
> 
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 10:12 PM Limonciello, Mario
> <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com> wrote:
> >
> > [Public]
> >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 08:34
> > > > To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>
> > > > Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Rafael J . Wysocki
> > > > <rjw@rjwysocki.net>; linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>;
> > > > regressions@lists.linux.dev; Thorsten Leemhuis (regressions address)
> > > > <regressions@leemhuis.info>
> > > > Subject: Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC
> regardless
> > > > of the query flag"" is causing regressions
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 07:24:34AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > > > > On 6/23/22 05:06, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Rafael, Mario,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Commit 2ca8e6285250 ("Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to
> the
> > > > > > _OSC regardless of the query flag"") is causing the issues fixed
> > > > > > by the reverted commit to show up again, see:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> > > >
> illa.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D213023&amp;data=05%7C01%7Cm
> > > >
> > >
> ario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C3d
> > > >
> > >
> d8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7CU
> > > >
> nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI
> > > >
> 6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=KxmNvCfdm
> > > > qvk5gXteXUDXHVTK45yEt%2BUYO4vaBbLXis%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > > > >
> > > >
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> > > >
> illa.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D1963717&amp;data=05%7C01%7C
> > > >
> > >
> mario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C
> > > >
> > >
> 3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7
> > > >
> CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJ
> > > >
> BTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=pZRqAG3
> > > >
> %2Bg0QevLOGZ8m9PNxcmkmh58soT2dSLg%2B6qWc%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > both of which have comments from the reporters that
> > > > > > the error message is back again; and presumably also
> > > > > > that /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc is missing
> > > > > > again.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can you please take a look and see if we can come up with
> > > > > > something which fixes both the re-surfaced issue, as well
> > > > > > as the issue which the revert tries to address ?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Is it possible that c42fa24b44751c62c86e98430ef915c0609a2ab8 didn't
> > > > backport
> > > > > to the stable trees it popped back up again?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It is only in 5.18, no stable releases that I can see.
> > >
> > > I think that should probably come back to stable along with everything
> this
> > > revert went back to, but before doing that perhaps we can get someone
> > > affected to confirm cherry-picking it helps.
> >
> > Users have reported to the Kernel Bugzilla that just picking that patch didn't
> > help.  At it's core it "seems" to me the firmware masks CPPC support in the
> _OSC
> > and previously that was actually ignored.  Since the final SSDT with the
> PR0._CPC
> > is loaded dynamically based on whether CPPC was supported this runtime
> error
> > happens.
> >
> > As multiple people have been duplicated into that bug let's work through
> some
> > ideas on it there.  To start out I've left a suggestion in there for users to
> have a
> > try with.
> 
> Honestly, at this point I'm inclined to revert the commit in question.

Isn't that just trading a regression for a regression?

Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless of the query flag"" is causing regressions

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 3:08 PM Limonciello, Mario
<Mario.Limonciello@amd.com> wrote:
>
> [Public]
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 06:40
> > To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>
> > Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Rafael J . Wysocki
> > <rjw@rjwysocki.net>; linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>;
> > regressions@lists.linux.dev; Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>;
> > rui.zhang@intel.com
> > Subject: Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC regardless
> > of the query flag"" is causing regressions
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 10:12 PM Limonciello, Mario
> > <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > [Public]
> > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 08:34
> > > > > To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>
> > > > > Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Rafael J . Wysocki
> > > > > <rjw@rjwysocki.net>; linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>;
> > > > > regressions@lists.linux.dev; Thorsten Leemhuis (regressions address)
> > > > > <regressions@leemhuis.info>
> > > > > Subject: Re: "Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to the _OSC
> > regardless
> > > > > of the query flag"" is causing regressions
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 07:24:34AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > > > > > On 6/23/22 05:06, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Rafael, Mario,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Commit 2ca8e6285250 ("Revert "ACPI: Pass the same capabilities to
> > the
> > > > > > > _OSC regardless of the query flag"") is causing the issues fixed
> > > > > > > by the reverted commit to show up again, see:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> > > > >
> > illa.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D213023&amp;data=05%7C01%7Cm
> > > > >
> > > >
> > ario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C3d
> > > > >
> > > >
> > d8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7CU
> > > > >
> > nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI
> > > > >
> > 6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=KxmNvCfdm
> > > > > qvk5gXteXUDXHVTK45yEt%2BUYO4vaBbLXis%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> > > > >
> > illa.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D1963717&amp;data=05%7C01%7C
> > > > >
> > > >
> > mario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C0040716e869d4021ce3208da551d082d%7C
> > > > >
> > > >
> > 3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637915880426388833%7
> > > > >
> > CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJ
> > > > >
> > BTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=pZRqAG3
> > > > >
> > %2Bg0QevLOGZ8m9PNxcmkmh58soT2dSLg%2B6qWc%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > both of which have comments from the reporters that
> > > > > > > the error message is back again; and presumably also
> > > > > > > that /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/acpi_cppc is missing
> > > > > > > again.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can you please take a look and see if we can come up with
> > > > > > > something which fixes both the re-surfaced issue, as well
> > > > > > > as the issue which the revert tries to address ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is it possible that c42fa24b44751c62c86e98430ef915c0609a2ab8 didn't
> > > > > backport
> > > > > > to the stable trees it popped back up again?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It is only in 5.18, no stable releases that I can see.
> > > >
> > > > I think that should probably come back to stable along with everything
> > this
> > > > revert went back to, but before doing that perhaps we can get someone
> > > > affected to confirm cherry-picking it helps.
> > >
> > > Users have reported to the Kernel Bugzilla that just picking that patch didn't
> > > help.  At it's core it "seems" to me the firmware masks CPPC support in the
> > _OSC
> > > and previously that was actually ignored.  Since the final SSDT with the
> > PR0._CPC
> > > is loaded dynamically based on whether CPPC was supported this runtime
> > error
> > > happens.
> > >
> > > As multiple people have been duplicated into that bug let's work through
> > some
> > > ideas on it there.  To start out I've left a suggestion in there for users to
> > have a
> > > try with.
> >
> > Honestly, at this point I'm inclined to revert the commit in question.
>
> Isn't that just trading a regression for a regression?

Yes, it would be.

OK, let's see what you can figure out in the bug entries.