public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
To: Aaron Rainbolt <arainbolt@kfocus.org>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org
Cc: lenb@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mmikowski@kfocus.org, Perry Yuan <Perry.Yuan@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: Allow ignoring _OSC CPPC v2 bit via kernel parameter
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:09:19 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b516084f-909e-4ea4-b450-3ee15c5e3527@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZnD22b3Br1ng7alf@kf-XE>

On 6/17/2024 21:54, Aaron Rainbolt wrote:
> acpi: Allow ignoring _OSC CPPC v2 bit via kernel parameter
> 
> The _OSC is supposed to contain a bit indicating whether the hardware
> supports CPPC v2 or not. This bit is not always set, causing CPPC v2 to
> be considered absent. This results in severe single-core performance
> issues with the EEVDF scheduler.
> 
> To work around this, provide a new kernel parameter,
> "processor.ignore_osc_cppc_bit", which may be used to ignore the _OSC
> CPPC v2 bit and act as if the bit was enabled. This allows CPPC to be
> properly detected even if not "enabled" by _OSC, allowing users with
> problematic hardware to obtain decent single-core performance.
> 
> Tested-by: Michael Mikowski <mmikowski@kfocus.org>
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Rainbolt <arainbolt@kfocus.org>

This sounds like a platform bug and if we do accept a patch like this I 
think we need a lot more documentation about the situation.

Can you please share more information about your hardware:
1) Manufacturer?
2) CPU?
3) Manufacturer firmware version?
4) If it's AMD what's the AGESA version?

And most importantly do you have the latest system firmware version from 
your manufacturer?  If not; please upgrade that first.

> 
> ---
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> index 1d857978f5f4..53406dd6cb87 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> @@ -671,7 +671,7 @@ static inline void arch_init_invariance_cppc(void) { }
>    *
>    *	Return: 0 for success or negative value for err.
>    */
> -int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> +int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr, bool ignore_osc_cppc_bit)
>   {
>   	struct acpi_buffer output = {ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL};
>   	union acpi_object *out_obj, *cpc_obj;
> @@ -686,7 +686,7 @@ int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>   
>   	if (!osc_sb_cppc2_support_acked) {
>   		pr_debug("CPPC v2 _OSC not acked\n");
> -		if (!cpc_supported_by_cpu()) {
> +		if (!ignore_osc_cppc_bit && !cpc_supported_by_cpu()) {
>   			pr_debug("CPPC is not supported by the CPU\n");
>   			return -ENODEV;
>   		}
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> index 67db60eda370..a183bca6c1c5 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,11 @@ MODULE_AUTHOR("Paul Diefenbaugh");
>   MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ACPI Processor Driver");
>   MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>   
> +static bool ignore_osc_cppc_bit = false;
> +module_param(ignore_osc_cppc_bit, bool, 0);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(ignore_osc_cppc_bit,
> +	"Ignore _OSC CPPC bit, assume CPPC v2 is present");
> +
>   static int acpi_processor_start(struct device *dev);
>   static int acpi_processor_stop(struct device *dev);
>   
> @@ -170,7 +175,7 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct acpi_device *device)
>   	if (pr->flags.need_hotplug_init)
>   		return 0;
>   
> -	result = acpi_cppc_processor_probe(pr);
> +	result = acpi_cppc_processor_probe(pr, ignore_osc_cppc_bit);
>   	if (result && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS))
>   		dev_dbg(&device->dev, "CPPC data invalid or not present\n");
>   
> diff --git a/include/acpi/processor.h b/include/acpi/processor.h
> index 3f34ebb27525..79fd61b3f537 100644
> --- a/include/acpi/processor.h
> +++ b/include/acpi/processor.h
> @@ -358,10 +358,10 @@ int acpi_map_cpuid(phys_cpuid_t phys_id, u32 acpi_id);
>   int acpi_get_cpuid(acpi_handle, int type, u32 acpi_id);
>   
>   #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB
> -extern int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr);
> +extern int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr, bool ignore_osc_cppc_bit);
>   extern void acpi_cppc_processor_exit(struct acpi_processor *pr);
>   #else
> -static inline int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> +static inline int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr, bool ignore_osc_cppc_bit)
>   {
>   	return 0;
>   }


  reply	other threads:[~2024-06-18 17:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-18  2:54 [PATCH] acpi: Allow ignoring _OSC CPPC v2 bit via kernel parameter Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-18 17:09 ` Mario Limonciello [this message]
2024-06-18 18:30   ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-18 18:35     ` Mario Limonciello
2024-06-18 18:52       ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-18 18:58         ` Mario Limonciello
2024-06-18 19:25           ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-18 19:27             ` Mario Limonciello
2024-06-18 20:25               ` [PATCH V2 RFC] " Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-18 20:58                 ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-18 21:24                 ` Mario Limonciello
2024-06-18 21:47                   ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-19  4:33                     ` [PATCH V3] " Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-19  5:08                       ` Mario Limonciello
2024-06-19 17:09                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-06-19 17:30                         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-06-19 17:44                           ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-19 17:56                           ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-19 21:39                           ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-19 22:19                             ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-20  1:05                               ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-20 15:40                                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-06-19 17:34                         ` Aaron Rainbolt
2024-06-19 17:37                           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-06-18 18:31 ` [PATCH] " kernel test robot

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=b516084f-909e-4ea4-b450-3ee15c5e3527@amd.com \
    --to=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
    --cc=Perry.Yuan@amd.com \
    --cc=arainbolt@kfocus.org \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mmikowski@kfocus.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    /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