From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Al Stone <ahs3@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / CPPC: do not require the _PSD method when using CPPC
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 12:41:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190807114118.GJ16546@e107155-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190805170338.29493-1-ahs3@redhat.com>
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 11:03:38AM -0600, Al Stone wrote:
> According to the ACPI 6.3 specification, the _PSD method is optional
> when using CPPC. The underlying assumption appears to be that each CPU
> can change frequency independently from all other CPUs; _PSD is provided
> to tell the OS that some processors can NOT do that.
>
> However, the acpi_get_psd() function returns -ENODEV if there is no _PSD
> method present, or an ACPI error status if an error occurs when evaluating
> _PSD, if present. This essentially makes _PSD mandatory when using CPPC,
> in violation of the specification, and only on Linux.
>
> This has forced some firmware writers to provide a dummy _PSD, even though
> it is irrelevant, but only because Linux requires it; other OSPMs follow
> the spec. We really do not want to have OS specific ACPI tables, though.
>
> So, correct acpi_get_psd() so that it does not return an error if there
> is no _PSD method present, but does return a failure when the method can
> not be executed properly. This allows _PSD to be optional as it should
> be.
>
Makes sense to me. FWIW,
Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla < sudeep.holla@arm.com>
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-07 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-05 17:03 [PATCH] ACPI / CPPC: do not require the _PSD method when using CPPC Al Stone
2019-08-07 11:41 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2019-08-10 17:25 ` Al Stone
2019-08-13 14:00 ` Al Stone
2019-08-13 21:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-13 22:15 ` Al Stone
2019-08-13 21:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-13 22:26 ` Al Stone
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=20190807114118.GJ16546@e107155-lin \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=ahs3@redhat.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).