From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
"Yu, Luming" <luming.yu@intel.com>,
Philip Langdale <philipl@overt.org>,
Jeff Garrett <jeff@jgarrett.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"venki@google.com" <venki@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: create "processor.bm_check_disable" boot param
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 20:19:10 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1007262007550.5292@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k4oiiu3x.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
> > Note also that an alternative for newer systems
> > is to use the intel_idle driver, which always
> > ignores BM_STS, relying Linux device drivers
> > to register constraints explicitly via PM_QOS.
> >
> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15886
>
> Thanks. I don't fully understand why the check for this option
> is in a different place than the register check in the earlier patch?
Technically, it could have been.
There are a comple of constraints in the layout of this code.
The _CST flag is x86 (actually Intel) specific -- so the detection
went into arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cstate.c
However, the operation of the that flag is per C-state,
not necessarily per system -- so we remember the flag
in in a cx->bm_sts_skip flag and check it in the
'acpi generic' drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
But we can't test a per cx flag inside acpi_idle_bm_check()
because it doesn't have access to the cx, so i put that
test at the site of its only caller.
In this 2nd patch...
we added a 'generic' ACPI bootparam that applies
to all C-states. So it overrides any per-cstate flag
and it is static to the processor_idle.c file,
so it seemed cleanest (to me)
to push it down inside acpi_idle_bm_check()
rather than in its only caller.
> This needs to be also documented in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
I thought about that and decided against it.
While we do document some driver specific modparams
in kernel-parameters.txt, I do not expect this one to
be used that often -- mostly for diagnosis of BIOS bugs.
I know of two machines that need it,
and both of those machines have a BIOS update
or a BIOS update in progress that make it unnecessary.
thanks for caring.
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-27 0:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-26 8:47 acpi_idle: Very idle Core i7 machine never enters C3 Jeff Garrett
2010-01-26 12:41 ` peng huang
2010-01-26 14:59 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-01-27 13:27 ` peng huang
2010-02-05 16:22 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-01-26 21:45 ` Andi Kleen
2010-02-05 16:09 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-02-05 17:45 ` Len Brown
2010-02-05 20:53 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-04-27 2:40 ` Philip Langdale
2010-04-27 7:26 ` Len Brown
2010-04-27 15:41 ` Philip Langdale
2010-04-27 12:47 ` Jeff Garrett
2010-04-30 14:57 ` Philip Langdale
2010-04-30 16:25 ` Len Brown
2010-04-30 17:44 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-04-30 18:35 ` Philip Langdale
2010-05-25 5:43 ` Len Brown
2010-05-25 5:59 ` Yu, Luming
2010-05-25 12:39 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-05-25 12:43 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-05-25 15:33 ` Len Brown
2010-05-25 18:55 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-07-21 21:31 ` [PATCH] ACPI: make acpi_idle Nehalem-aware Len Brown
2010-07-22 0:53 ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-07-22 7:47 ` Andi Kleen
2010-07-22 15:57 ` Len Brown
2010-07-22 21:21 ` [PATCH] ACPI: skip checking BM_STS if the BIOS doesn't ask for it Len Brown
2010-07-22 21:40 ` [PATCH] ACPI: create "processor.bm_check_disable" boot param Len Brown
2010-07-26 7:24 ` Andi Kleen
2010-07-27 0:19 ` Len Brown [this message]
2010-07-27 11:28 ` Andi Kleen
2010-07-28 18:58 ` Len Brown
2010-07-22 21:25 ` [PATCH] ACPI: make acpi_idle Nehalem-aware Iain
2010-07-22 21:53 ` Iain
2010-07-22 22:01 ` Len Brown
2010-07-23 12:40 ` Iain
2010-08-03 6:55 ` Pavel Machek
2010-08-03 7:05 ` Andi Kleen
2010-05-25 12:37 ` acpi_idle: Very idle Core i7 machine never enters C3 Matthew Garrett
2010-05-25 15:40 ` Len Brown
2010-07-22 5:34 ` Len Brown
2010-02-01 14:10 ` Pavel Machek
2010-02-05 16:30 ` Jeff Garrett
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.1007262007550.5292@localhost.localdomain \
--to=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=jeff@jgarrett.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luming.yu@intel.com \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=philipl@overt.org \
--cc=venki@google.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