From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 213F9F9D0CE for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 13:14:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=p6w550N0MxEwxNAHSInqETjhVWVfzaLbGQYn5bMQkuk=; b=qHdwjE8aGLkrOY4e+ZkI4sp2dV wZtiR8TO/1ECTiqRISzWFqX1EbZRTvynyPYy+CvvwdWi5NZbdWwwIdBCFhTd4l3N+E0yqSsZo0tQe EigAjJgbFd0bsc7O3AFr8SHI9i/hGpkqACEmTwsppuYRn2/fEE+MwuXb5+xkGAS1ESszeGgZuyjEE pcpkeme7eESMuQ+zylw/0lI2MTW8BbGc7F8CadVa3ILjjZ/lOs8EdlwejhOG+tGhKAqW7SfzXmENS aXxlK40sjUg/t9/+/DU/mUvuctAOZh2i865W3OPdXoqQ1k77NCubTH2PiYSU5NgKxPs9FTnM3atOD ceHeppLg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wCdbL-0000000HM3y-2A1y; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 13:14:47 +0000 Received: from stravinsky.debian.org ([2001:41b8:202:deb::311:108]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wCdbI-0000000HM2e-25Y8 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 13:14:45 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debian.org; s=smtpauto.stravinsky; h=X-Debian-User:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=p6w550N0MxEwxNAHSInqETjhVWVfzaLbGQYn5bMQkuk=; b=XlTlVTrF7k4kweRqsnLhib6u2s JBVZbhwkXgqWFEOAq1frC3U41CvvnE4H7d5DcfmfLjYN3/IjfFYQCWSnIXeNP322WjdezqWyz7JH8 4dw41S+JTbqQrEDCQIZy1J7L7MaJenecODg6bLCc6UPpAp60Tkdimy5zFCB3Mw4VVXbvkW3uErNt2 otJo5JbZIeOH4QLsrNHhI29zee0WDcpO8TBVsm69UOYvmuPE8VtS5CI6favDXclujdaLLZrGEmwvJ 10fSHky5bxCsBXlFdslmXX+LID5KESeqvgYGCfxv2oiDqvXkZ5nmRNByU9jGspmYIdaup0sABsG3S v6S+BV2Q==; Received: from authenticated user by stravinsky.debian.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wCday-00D5gf-1t; Tue, 14 Apr 2026 13:14:24 +0000 Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2026 06:14:19 -0700 From: Breno Leitao To: Sudeep Holla Cc: "lihuisong (C)" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , lpieralisi@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pjaroszynski@nvidia.com, guohanjun@huawei.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, rmikey@meta.com, kernel-team@meta.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] ACPI: processor: idle: Do not propagate acpi_processor_ffh_lpi_probe() -ENODEV Message-ID: References: <20260413-ffh-v1-1-301704f69e2f@debian.org> <6694ca7c-13bf-4e7d-9621-bc992cbf96a7@huawei.com> <20260414-cute-shapeless-dolphin-c5b2fc@sudeepholla> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260414-cute-shapeless-dolphin-c5b2fc@sudeepholla> X-Debian-User: leitao X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260414_061444_540993_347420C1 X-CRM114-Status: UNSURE ( 8.82 ) X-CRM114-Notice: Please train this message. X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hello Sudeep, On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 01:25:53PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > So while I understand that the kernel did not report an error previously, that > does not mean the _LPI table is merely moot on this platform when it contains > only a WFI state. Can you clarify whether datacenter ARM systems are expected to expose deeper idle states beyond WFI in their _LPI tables? Backing up, I'm observing 72 pr_err() messages during boot on these hosts and trying to determine whether this indicates a firmware issue or if the kernel needs adjustment.