Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/2] thermal: intel: Protect clearing of thermal status bits

[srinivas pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>]

On Fri, 2022-11-18 at 20:49 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 8:40 PM srinivas pandruvada
> <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2022-11-18 at 18:57 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 3:54 AM Srinivas Pandruvada
> > > <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > The clearing of the package thermal status is done by Read-
> > > > Modify-
> > > > Write
> > > > operation. This may result in clearing of some new status bits
> > > > which are
> > > > being or about to be processed.
> > > > 
> > > > For example, while clearing of HFI status, after read of thermal
> > > > status
> > > > register, a new thermal status bit is set by the hardware. But
> > > > during
> > > > write back, the newly generated status bit will be set to 0 or
> > > > cleared.
> > > > So, it is not safe to do read-modify-write.
> > > > 
> > > > Since thermal status Read-Write bits can be set to only 0 not 1,
> > > > it
> > > > is
> > > > safe to set all other bits to 1 which are not getting cleared.
> > > > 
> > > > Create a common interface for clearing package thermal status
> > > > bits.
> > > > Use
> > > > this interface to replace existing code to clear thermal package
> > > > status
> > > > bits.
> > > > 
> > > > It is safe to call from different CPUs without protection as
> > > > there
> > > > is no
> > > > read-modify-write. Also wrmsrl results in just single
> > > > instruction.
> > > > For
> > > > example while CPU 0 and CPU 3 are clearing bit 1 and 3
> > > > respectively. If
> > > > CPU 3 wins the race, it will write 0x4000aa2, then CPU 1 will
> > > > write
> > > > 0x4000aa8. The bits which are not part of clear are set to 1. The
> > > > default
> > > > mask for bits, which can be written here is 0x4000aaa.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada
> > > > <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > How urgent is this?  Would 6.2 be sufficient?
> > > 
> > Not urgent. 6.2 should be enough.
> 
> OK
> 
> > > Also, do you want it to go into -stable?
> > Yes.
> 
> Which series?
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.18+

Thanks,
Srinivas