public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	bp@alien8.de, rafael@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org,
	dave.jiang@intel.com, irenic.rajneesh@gmail.com,
	david.e.box@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] x86/acpi: Check MWAIT feature instead of CPUID level
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 13:46:17 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49690bcc-e2ac-43f6-95da-3711801e195a@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zz9S352550TZSKBQ@google.com>

On 11/21/24 07:33, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> I think this code is possibly buggy.  The CPU could have a high
>> c->cpuid_level and not support MWAIT at all.
> 
> Reading CPUID.0x5 is totally fine in that case though.  Wasteful and pointless,
> but functionally ok.  If the CPU provides non-zero values when MWAIT is unsupported,
> then that's a broken CPU.

That's a good point.

I was mostly worried about consuming *bad* data from CPUID.5, but the
leaf check takes care of that now.

>> diff -puN arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cstate.c~mwait-leaf-checks-3 arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cstate.c
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cstate.c~mwait-leaf-checks-3	2024-11-20 11:44:17.225650902 -0800
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cstate.c	2024-11-20 11:44:17.225650902 -0800
>> @@ -173,7 +173,7 @@ int acpi_processor_ffh_cstate_probe(unsi
>>  	struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
>>  	long retval;
>>  
>> -	if (!cpu_cstate_entry || c->cpuid_level < CPUID_MWAIT_LEAF)
>> +	if (!cpu_cstate_entry || cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_MWAIT))
> 
> Someone didn't test this :-)

Guilty.

I'll just drop this.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-11-21 21:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-20 19:53 [PATCH 00/11] x86/cpu: Centralize and standardize CPUID leaf naming Dave Hansen
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 01/11] x86/cpu: Move MWAIT leaf definition to common header Dave Hansen
2024-11-26  3:20   ` Zhao Liu
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 02/11] x86/cpu: Use MWAIT leaf definition Dave Hansen
2024-11-26  3:24   ` Zhao Liu
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 03/11] x86/cpu: Remove unnecessary MwAIT leaf checks Dave Hansen
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 04/11] x86/acpi: Check MWAIT feature instead of CPUID level Dave Hansen
2024-11-21 15:33   ` Sean Christopherson
2024-11-21 21:46     ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 05/11] x86/cpu: Refresh DCA leaf reading code Dave Hansen
2024-11-26  4:11   ` Zhao Liu
2024-11-26  3:55     ` Dave Hansen
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 06/11] x86/cpu: Move TSC CPUID leaf definition Dave Hansen
2024-11-26  4:23   ` Zhao Liu
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 07/11] x86/tsc: Move away from TSC leaf magic numbers Dave Hansen
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 08/11] x86/tsc: Remove CPUID "frequency" " Dave Hansen
2024-11-26  4:37   ` Zhao Liu
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 09/11] x86/fpu: Move CPUID leaf definitions to common code Dave Hansen
2024-11-26  4:43   ` Zhao Liu
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 10/11] x86/fpu: Remove unnecessary CPUID level check Dave Hansen
2024-11-21 15:45   ` Sean Christopherson
2024-11-22 17:46     ` Dave Hansen
2024-11-20 19:53 ` [PATCH 11/11] x86/cpu: Make all all CPUID leaf names consistent Dave Hansen
2024-11-20 20:23   ` Dave Jiang
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-10-30 21:33 [PATCH 00/11] x86/cpu: Centralize and standardize CPUID leaf naming Dave Hansen
2024-10-30 21:33 ` [PATCH 04/11] x86/acpi: Check MWAIT feature instead of CPUID level Dave Hansen

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=49690bcc-e2ac-43f6-95da-3711801e195a@intel.com \
    --to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=david.e.box@intel.com \
    --cc=irenic.rajneesh@gmail.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@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