From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
To: Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@arm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v1 15/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Add switch for strict _LPI processing
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2026 14:42:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3896986.MHq7AAxBmi@rafael.j.wysocki> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4746278.LvFx2qVVIh@rafael.j.wysocki>
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Add a "strict" argument to acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info() that, when
set, will cause it to ignore _LPI states without minimum residency or
wake latency instead of assuming 10 us values for these parameters.
No intentional functional impact.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++------
drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 2 +-
include/linux/acpi.h | 6 ++++--
3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
index cdba1aee84e9..5fbab54171b7 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
@@ -1018,7 +1018,7 @@ static int obj_get_integer(union acpi_object *obj, u32 *value)
static void process_lpi_state_package(union acpi_object *lpi_pkg,
struct acpi_lpi_state *lpi_state,
acpi_handle handle,
- unsigned int state_idx)
+ unsigned int state_idx, bool strict)
{
union acpi_object *lpi_pkg_elem, *obj;
@@ -1054,11 +1054,21 @@ static void process_lpi_state_package(union acpi_object *lpi_pkg,
}
if (obj_get_integer(&lpi_pkg_elem[0], &lpi_state->min_residency)) {
+ if (strict) {
+ lpi_state_debug(handle, "No min. residency", state_idx);
+ return;
+ }
+
lpi_state_debug(handle, "Assuming 10 us min. residency", state_idx);
lpi_state->min_residency = 10;
}
if (obj_get_integer(&lpi_pkg_elem[1], &lpi_state->wake_latency)) {
+ if (strict) {
+ lpi_state_debug(handle, "No wake latency", state_idx);
+ return;
+ }
+
lpi_state_debug(handle, "Assuming 10 us wake latency", state_idx);
lpi_state->wake_latency = 10;
}
@@ -1090,7 +1100,8 @@ static void process_lpi_state_package(union acpi_object *lpi_pkg,
}
static int acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi(acpi_handle handle,
- struct acpi_lpi_states_array *info)
+ struct acpi_lpi_states_array *info,
+ bool strict)
{
struct acpi_buffer buffer = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
union acpi_object *lpi_data, *lpi_pkg;
@@ -1138,7 +1149,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi(acpi_handle handle,
for (state_idx = 1; state_idx <= lpi_pkg_count; state_idx++) {
lpi_state->index = state_idx;
- process_lpi_state_package(lpi_pkg++, lpi_state++, handle, state_idx);
+ process_lpi_state_package(lpi_pkg++, lpi_state++, handle,
+ state_idx, strict);
}
acpi_handle_debug(handle, "Found %u power states\n", lpi_pkg_count);
@@ -1245,7 +1257,8 @@ static unsigned int flatten_lpi_states(acpi_handle handle,
}
int acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info(acpi_handle pr_handle,
- struct acpi_processor_power *pr_power)
+ struct acpi_processor_power *pr_power,
+ bool strict)
{
struct acpi_lpi_states_array info[2], *prev, *curr;
acpi_handle handle = pr_handle;
@@ -1259,7 +1272,7 @@ int acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info(acpi_handle pr_handle,
curr = &info[0];
curr->composite_states_size = 0;
- ret = acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi(handle, curr);
+ ret = acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi(handle, curr, strict);
if (ret)
return ret;
@@ -1312,7 +1325,7 @@ int acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info(acpi_handle pr_handle,
curr->composite_states_size = 0;
- ret = acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi(handle, curr);
+ ret = acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi(handle, curr, strict);
if (ret)
break;
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
index 44a52148bc25..e113bcbbb882 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
@@ -867,7 +867,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_lpi_info(struct acpi_processor *pr)
if (ret == -EOPNOTSUPP)
return ret;
- ret = acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info(pr->handle, &pr->power);
+ ret = acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info(pr->handle, &pr->power, false);
if (ret)
return ret;
diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
index 1d3ea92a2344..9e418b23373c 100644
--- a/include/linux/acpi.h
+++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
@@ -317,10 +317,12 @@ static inline int acpi_processor_evaluate_cst(acpi_handle handle, u32 cpu,
#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR_IDLE
int acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info(acpi_handle pr_handle,
- struct acpi_processor_power *pr_power);
+ struct acpi_processor_power *pr_power,
+ bool strict);
#else
static inline int acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info(acpi_handle pr_handle,
- struct acpi_processor_power *pr_power)
+ struct acpi_processor_power *pr_power,
+ bool strict)
{
return -ENODEV;
}
--
2.51.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-09 12:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-09 12:29 [PATCH v1 00/17] ACPI: processor: idle/intel_idle: Add ACPI _LPI support to intel_idle Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:30 ` [PATCH v1 01/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Expand _LPI package sanity checks Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:31 ` [PATCH v1 02/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Ignore _LPI states with SYSTEMIO entry method Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:32 ` [PATCH v1 03/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Unify debug in acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:33 ` [PATCH v1 04/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Rearrange acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:34 ` [PATCH v1 05/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Split acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:35 ` [PATCH v1 06/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Introduce lpi_state_debug() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:36 ` [PATCH v1 07/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Rearrange acpi_processor_get_lpi_info() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:37 ` [PATCH v1 08/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Rework first-level _LPI states processing Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:37 ` [PATCH v1 09/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Drop redundant _LPI presence checks Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:38 ` [PATCH v1 10/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Rearrange loop in acpi_processor_get_lpi_info() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:39 ` [PATCH v1 11/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Rework flatten_lpi_states() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:39 ` [PATCH v1 12/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Introduce too_many_states() for _LPI Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:40 ` [PATCH v1 13/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Introduce acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:41 ` [PATCH v1 14/17] ACPI: processor: idle: Relocate acpi_processor_extract_lpi_info() Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:42 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2026-07-09 12:43 ` [PATCH v1 16/17] intel_idle: Prepare for adding ACPI _LPI support Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-07-09 12:44 ` [PATCH v1 17/17] intel_idle: Add " Rafael J. Wysocki
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=3896986.MHq7AAxBmi@rafael.j.wysocki \
--to=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=Sudeep.Holla@arm.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.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