All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
To: Yu Chen <yu.c.chen@intel.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: enable HWP before manipulating on corresponding registers
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:44:59 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1516920299.16193.21.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180125110802.15141-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com>

On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 19:08 +0800, Yu Chen wrote:

Thanks for debugging.

> The following warning was triggered after resumed from S3 -
> if all the nonboot CPUs were put offline before suspend:
> 
> [ 1840.329515] unchecked MSR access error: RDMSR from 0x771 at rIP:
> 0xffffffff86061e3a (native_read_msr+0xa/0x30)
[...]

[ 1840.329556]  acpi_processor_ppc_has_changed+0x65/0x80

This is the problem. You are getting a _PPC during resume which needs
_PSS table to really do anything.

So the correct fix should not in intel_pstate IMO but

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c
b/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c
index 18b72ee..c7cf48a 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c
@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ void acpi_processor_ppc_has_changed(struct
acpi_processor *pr, int event_flag)
 {
        int ret;
 
-       if (ignore_ppc) {
+       if (ignore_ppc || !pr->performance) {
                /*
                 * Only when it is notification event, the _OST object
                 * will be evaluated. Otherwise it is skipped.


...
Since we don't call acpi_processor_register_performance(), the pr-
>performance will be NULL. When this is NULL we don't need to do PPC
change notification.
Even if we register performance, processing a PPC notification is
complex as we have to wait for PPC=0 before enabling HWP otherwise we
will be stuck with low performance (The event may not come once in HWP
is in control).

The important bug which you identified need a fix in resume when
maxcpus=1.

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
index 93a0e88..10e5efc 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
@@ -779,13 +779,16 @@ static int intel_pstate_hwp_save_state(struct
cpufreq_policy *policy)
        return 0;
 }
 
+static void intel_pstate_hwp_enable(struct cpudata *cpudata);
+
 static int intel_pstate_resume(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
 {
        if (!hwp_active)
                return 0;
 
        mutex_lock(&intel_pstate_limits_lock);
-
+       if (!policy->cpu)
+               intel_pstate_hwp_enable(all_cpu_data[policy->cpu]);
        all_cpu_data[policy->cpu]->epp_policy = 0;
        intel_pstate_hwp_set(policy->cpu);


Thanks,
Srinivas


> This is because if there's only one online CPU, the MSR_PM_ENABLE
> (package wide)can not be enabled after resumed, due to
> intel_pstate_hwp_enable() will only be invoked on AP's online
> process after resumed - if there's no AP online, the HWP remains
> disabled after resumed (BIOS has disabled it in S3).
> 
> The re-enabling of HWP can not be put into intel_pstate_resume()
> as it is too late according to the log above. It is applicable
> to do it in syscore_resume() but this requires a new notifier.
> Thus forcely enable the HWP before manipulating on them, and this
> should not impact much because users seldom touch HWP registers.
> 
> Reported-by: Doug Smythies <dsmythies@telus.net>
> Signed-off-by: Yu Chen <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> index 93a0e88bef76..b808f0127192 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> @@ -689,6 +689,8 @@ static void intel_pstate_get_hwp_max(unsigned int
> cpu, int *phy_max,
>  {
>  	u64 cap;
>  
> +	/* In case HWP is disabled after resumed from S3. */
> +	wrmsrl_on_cpu(cpu, MSR_PM_ENABLE, 0x1);
>  	rdmsrl_on_cpu(cpu, MSR_HWP_CAPABILITIES, &cap);
>  	if (global.no_turbo)
>  		*current_max = HWP_GUARANTEED_PERF(cap);
> @@ -711,6 +713,8 @@ static void intel_pstate_hwp_set(unsigned int
> cpu)
>  	if (cpu_data->policy == CPUFREQ_POLICY_PERFORMANCE)
>  		min = max;
>  
> +	/* In case HWP is disabled after resumed from S3. */
> +	wrmsrl_on_cpu(cpu, MSR_PM_ENABLE, 0x1);
>  	rdmsrl_on_cpu(cpu, MSR_HWP_REQUEST, &value);
>  
>  	value &= ~HWP_MIN_PERF(~0L);

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-25 22:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-25 11:08 [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: enable HWP before manipulating on corresponding registers Yu Chen
2018-01-25 22:44 ` Srinivas Pandruvada [this message]
2018-01-26  6:35   ` Yu Chen
2018-01-26 15:39     ` Srinivas Pandruvada

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=1516920299.16193.21.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dsmythies@telus.net \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.