Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] Revert "ACPI: CPPC: Adjust debug messages in amd_set_max_freq_ratio() to warn"

[Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>]

On 5/8/26 14:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, May 8, 2026 at 9:09 PM Mario Limonciello
> <mario.limonciello@amd.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/8/26 14:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 5, 2026 at 1:01 AM Mario Limonciello
>>> <mario.limonciello@amd.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Some older systems don't support CPPC in the firmware and this just makes
>>>> noise for them when booting.  Drop back to debug.
>>>>
>>>> This reverts commit 21fb59ab4b9767085f4fe1edbdbe3177fbb9ec97.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 21fb59ab4b976 ("ACPI: CPPC: Adjust debug messages in amd_set_max_freq_ratio() to warn")
>>>> Suggested-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@amd.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cppc.c | 6 +++---
>>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cppc.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cppc.c
>>>> index d7c8ef1e354d3..be4c5e9e5ff6f 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cppc.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cppc.c
>>>> @@ -88,19 +88,19 @@ static void amd_set_max_freq_ratio(void)
>>>>
>>>>           rc = cppc_get_perf_caps(0, &perf_caps);
>>>>           if (rc) {
>>>> -               pr_warn("Could not retrieve perf counters (%d)\n", rc);
>>>> +               pr_debug("Could not retrieve perf counters (%d)\n", rc);
>>>>                   return;
>>>>           }
>>>>
>>>>           rc = amd_get_boost_ratio_numerator(0, &numerator);
>>>>           if (rc) {
>>>> -               pr_warn("Could not retrieve highest performance (%d)\n", rc);
>>>> +               pr_debug("Could not retrieve highest performance (%d)\n", rc);
>>>>                   return;
>>>>           }
>>>>           nominal_perf = perf_caps.nominal_perf;
>>>>
>>>>           if (!nominal_perf) {
>>>> -               pr_warn("Could not retrieve nominal performance\n");
>>>> +               pr_debug("Could not retrieve nominal performance\n");
>>>>                   return;
>>>>           }
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>
>>> It looks like this could be applied without the rest of the series.
>>> Do you want me to do that?
>>
>> Yeah; go ahead and pick this one up.  Thanks.
> 
> Done, thanks!
> 
>>>
>>> Also, do I understand correctly that the rest of the series depends on
>>> Sumit's patch set at
>>>
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260430142430.755437-2-sumitg@nvidia.com/#r
>>
>> That's correct.
> 
> OK, so changes are requested in that patchset and there will be a v3
> (at least), so please resend this one when the dependency is
> finalized.

No problem, will rebase on the v3 for that and come along for the ride 
until ready.