[PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems

[PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems

[Ben Guthro]

In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
requested). Fix this, requiring a boolean parameter to be added to the
hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.

This requires adjusting TXT, but the adjustments only go as far as
failing the extended mode call (since, looking at the TXT interface,
there doesn't even appear to be precautions to deal with that
alternative interface).

The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
Cc: Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>
Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
Cc: Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 

v2: Extend description to include reference to hypervisor side change
v3: Split into multiple patches, separating subsystems
    Remove bool parameters, in favor of u8
v4: Remove linux/acpi.h dependencies
    Further patch split to break out acpica from OSL
    More bool vs u8 fixes
v5: Fix build of consumers of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() interface change,
    so intermediate builds of partial patch series will not fail.
v6: Rebased to linux-pm linux-next branch
    Added warning in tboot early return code
    Added Reviewed-by lines

Ben Guthro (5):
  acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code
  acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path
  acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended
    parameter
  x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep
  xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available

 arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c          |    9 ++++++++-
 drivers/acpi/acpica/hwesleep.c   |    7 +++++++
 drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c    |    3 +--
 drivers/acpi/osl.c               |   16 ++++++++--------
 drivers/xen/acpi.c               |   26 +++++++++++++-------------
 include/acpi/acpiosxf.h          |    6 ++++++
 include/linux/acpi.h             |    9 +++------
 include/xen/acpi.h               |    4 ++--
 include/xen/interface/platform.h |    7 ++++---
 9 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH v6 1/5] acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code

[Ben Guthro]

Move the definition of acpi_os_prepare_sleep into the OS services layer header,
and remove the include of linux/acpi.h from common acpica code.

Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c |    1 -
 include/acpi/acpiosxf.h       |    6 ++++++
 include/linux/acpi.h          |    3 ---
 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
index e3828cc..867b947 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
@@ -43,7 +43,6 @@
  */
 
 #include <acpi/acpi.h>
-#include <linux/acpi.h>
 #include "accommon.h"
 
 #define _COMPONENT          ACPI_HARDWARE
diff --git a/include/acpi/acpiosxf.h b/include/acpi/acpiosxf.h
index 64b8c76..7b402f2 100644
--- a/include/acpi/acpiosxf.h
+++ b/include/acpi/acpiosxf.h
@@ -276,4 +276,10 @@ char *acpi_os_get_next_filename(void *dir_handle);
 
 void acpi_os_close_directory(void *dir_handle);
 
+/*
+ * ACPI sleep preparation
+ */
+acpi_status acpi_os_prepare_sleep(u8 sleep_state,
+				  u32 pm1a_control, u32 pm1b_control);
+
 #endif				/* __ACPIOSXF_H__ */
diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
index 353ba25..5d5a47b 100644
--- a/include/linux/acpi.h
+++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
@@ -478,9 +478,6 @@ static inline bool acpi_driver_match_device(struct device *dev,
 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
 void acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep(int (*func)(u8 sleep_state,
 			       u32 pm1a_ctrl,  u32 pm1b_ctrl));
-
-acpi_status acpi_os_prepare_sleep(u8 sleep_state,
-				  u32 pm1a_control, u32 pm1b_control);
 #ifdef CONFIG_X86
 void arch_reserve_mem_area(acpi_physical_address addr, size_t size);
 #else
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH v6 2/5] acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path

[Ben Guthro]

In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
requested). Fix this, requiring a parameter to be added to the
hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpica/hwesleep.c |    7 +++++++
 drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c  |    2 +-
 include/acpi/acpiosxf.h        |    4 ++--
 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwesleep.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwesleep.c
index 5e5f762..69b3e15 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwesleep.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwesleep.c
@@ -128,6 +128,13 @@ acpi_status acpi_hw_extended_sleep(u8 sleep_state)
 
 	ACPI_FLUSH_CPU_CACHE();
 
+	status = acpi_os_prepare_sleep(sleep_state, acpi_gbl_sleep_type_a,
+				       acpi_gbl_sleep_type_b, TRUE);
+	if (ACPI_SKIP(status))
+		return_ACPI_STATUS(AE_OK);
+	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
+		return_ACPI_STATUS(status);
+
 	/*
 	 * Set the SLP_TYP and SLP_EN bits.
 	 *
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
index 867b947..cf78157 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
@@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ acpi_status acpi_hw_legacy_sleep(u8 sleep_state)
 	ACPI_FLUSH_CPU_CACHE();
 
 	status = acpi_os_prepare_sleep(sleep_state, pm1a_control,
-				       pm1b_control);
+				       pm1b_control, FALSE);
 	if (ACPI_SKIP(status))
 		return_ACPI_STATUS(AE_OK);
 	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
diff --git a/include/acpi/acpiosxf.h b/include/acpi/acpiosxf.h
index 7b402f2..3dc5ffa6 100644
--- a/include/acpi/acpiosxf.h
+++ b/include/acpi/acpiosxf.h
@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ void acpi_os_close_directory(void *dir_handle);
 /*
  * ACPI sleep preparation
  */
-acpi_status acpi_os_prepare_sleep(u8 sleep_state,
-				  u32 pm1a_control, u32 pm1b_control);
+acpi_status acpi_os_prepare_sleep(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a, u32 val_b,
+				  u8 extended);
 
 #endif				/* __ACPIOSXF_H__ */
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH v6 3/5] acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended parameter

[Ben Guthro]

Change the function definitions of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() and
acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep() to pass along the new extended sleep
parameter.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c |    3 ++-
 drivers/acpi/osl.c      |   16 ++++++++--------
 drivers/xen/acpi.c      |    3 ++-
 include/linux/acpi.h    |    6 +++---
 include/xen/acpi.h      |    3 ++-
 5 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c
index f84fe00..d578c9c 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c
@@ -273,7 +273,8 @@ static void tboot_copy_fadt(const struct acpi_table_fadt *fadt)
 		offsetof(struct acpi_table_facs, firmware_waking_vector);
 }
 
-static int tboot_sleep(u8 sleep_state, u32 pm1a_control, u32 pm1b_control)
+static int tboot_sleep(u8 sleep_state, u32 pm1a_control, u32 pm1b_control,
+		       bool extended)
 {
 	static u32 acpi_shutdown_map[ACPI_S_STATE_COUNT] = {
 		/* S0,1,2: */ -1, -1, -1,
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
index 6ab2c35..0fe91d5 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
@@ -77,8 +77,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_in_debugger);
 extern char line_buf[80];
 #endif				/*ENABLE_DEBUGGER */
 
-static int (*__acpi_os_prepare_sleep)(u8 sleep_state, u32 pm1a_ctrl,
-				      u32 pm1b_ctrl);
+static int (*__acpi_os_prepare_sleep)(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a, u32 val_b,
+				      bool extended);
 
 static acpi_osd_handler acpi_irq_handler;
 static void *acpi_irq_context;
@@ -1758,13 +1758,13 @@ acpi_status acpi_os_terminate(void)
 	return AE_OK;
 }
 
-acpi_status acpi_os_prepare_sleep(u8 sleep_state, u32 pm1a_control,
-				  u32 pm1b_control)
+acpi_status acpi_os_prepare_sleep(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a, u32 val_b,
+				  u8 extended)
 {
 	int rc = 0;
 	if (__acpi_os_prepare_sleep)
-		rc = __acpi_os_prepare_sleep(sleep_state,
-					     pm1a_control, pm1b_control);
+		rc = __acpi_os_prepare_sleep(sleep_state, val_a, val_b,
+					     extended);
 	if (rc < 0)
 		return AE_ERROR;
 	else if (rc > 0)
@@ -1773,8 +1773,8 @@ acpi_status acpi_os_prepare_sleep(u8 sleep_state, u32 pm1a_control,
 	return AE_OK;
 }
 
-void acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep(int (*func)(u8 sleep_state,
-			       u32 pm1a_ctrl, u32 pm1b_ctrl))
+void acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep(int (*func)(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a,
+			       u32 val_b, bool extended))
 {
 	__acpi_os_prepare_sleep = func;
 }
diff --git a/drivers/xen/acpi.c b/drivers/xen/acpi.c
index 119d42a..36d2be1 100644
--- a/drivers/xen/acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/xen/acpi.c
@@ -36,7 +36,8 @@
 #include <asm/xen/hypervisor.h>
 
 int xen_acpi_notify_hypervisor_state(u8 sleep_state,
-				     u32 pm1a_cnt, u32 pm1b_cnt)
+				     u32 pm1a_cnt, u32 pm1b_cnt,
+				     bool extended)
 {
 	struct xen_platform_op op = {
 		.cmd = XENPF_enter_acpi_sleep,
diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
index 5d5a47b..a78ebc0 100644
--- a/include/linux/acpi.h
+++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
@@ -476,8 +476,8 @@ static inline bool acpi_driver_match_device(struct device *dev,
 #endif	/* !CONFIG_ACPI */
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
-void acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep(int (*func)(u8 sleep_state,
-			       u32 pm1a_ctrl,  u32 pm1b_ctrl));
+void acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep(int (*func)(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a,
+			       u32 val_b, bool extended));
 #ifdef CONFIG_X86
 void arch_reserve_mem_area(acpi_physical_address addr, size_t size);
 #else
@@ -487,7 +487,7 @@ static inline void arch_reserve_mem_area(acpi_physical_address addr,
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG_X86 */
 #else
-#define acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep(func, pm1a_ctrl, pm1b_ctrl) do { } while (0)
+#define acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep(func, val_a, val_b, ext) do { } while (0)
 #endif
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_ACPI) && defined(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME)
diff --git a/include/xen/acpi.h b/include/xen/acpi.h
index 46aa3d1..8656055 100644
--- a/include/xen/acpi.h
+++ b/include/xen/acpi.h
@@ -76,7 +76,8 @@ static inline int xen_acpi_get_pxm(acpi_handle h)
 }
 
 int xen_acpi_notify_hypervisor_state(u8 sleep_state,
-				     u32 pm1a_cnt, u32 pm1b_cnd);
+				     u32 pm1a_cnt, u32 pm1b_cnd,
+				     bool extended);
 
 static inline int xen_acpi_suspend_lowlevel(void)
 {
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH v6 4/5] x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep

[Ben Guthro]

As tboot currently does not support the reduced hardware sleep
interface, fail this extended call.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c |    6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c
index d578c9c..76c284f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c
@@ -285,6 +285,12 @@ static int tboot_sleep(u8 sleep_state, u32 pm1a_control, u32 pm1b_control,
 	if (!tboot_enabled())
 		return 0;
 
+	if (extended)
+	if (WARN(extended,"tboot is not able to suspend on platforms with"
+	    " reduced hardware sleep (ACPIv5). Please contact"
+	    " tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailing list."))
+		return -1;
+
 	tboot_copy_fadt(&acpi_gbl_FADT);
 	tboot->acpi_sinfo.pm1a_cnt_val = pm1a_control;
 	tboot->acpi_sinfo.pm1b_cnt_val = pm1b_control;
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH v6 5/5] xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available

[Ben Guthro]

Make use of acpi_os_prepare_sleep extended parameter to notify xen
to make use of the reduced hardware sleep functionality

The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
Acked-by: Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
---
 drivers/xen/acpi.c               |   25 ++++++++++++-------------
 include/xen/acpi.h               |    3 +--
 include/xen/interface/platform.h |    7 ++++---
 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/xen/acpi.c b/drivers/xen/acpi.c
index 36d2be1..371dade 100644
--- a/drivers/xen/acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/xen/acpi.c
@@ -35,28 +35,27 @@
 #include <asm/xen/hypercall.h>
 #include <asm/xen/hypervisor.h>
 
-int xen_acpi_notify_hypervisor_state(u8 sleep_state,
-				     u32 pm1a_cnt, u32 pm1b_cnt,
+int xen_acpi_notify_hypervisor_state(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a, u32 val_b,
 				     bool extended)
 {
+	unsigned int bits = extended ? 8 : 16;
+
 	struct xen_platform_op op = {
 		.cmd = XENPF_enter_acpi_sleep,
 		.interface_version = XENPF_INTERFACE_VERSION,
-		.u = {
-			.enter_acpi_sleep = {
-				.pm1a_cnt_val = (u16)pm1a_cnt,
-				.pm1b_cnt_val = (u16)pm1b_cnt,
-				.sleep_state = sleep_state,
-			},
+		.u.enter_acpi_sleep = {
+			.val_a = (u16)val_a,
+			.val_b = (u16)val_b,
+			.sleep_state = sleep_state,
+			.flags = extended ? XENPF_ACPI_SLEEP_EXTENDED : 0,
 		},
 	};
 
-	if ((pm1a_cnt & 0xffff0000) || (pm1b_cnt & 0xffff0000)) {
-		WARN(1, "Using more than 16bits of PM1A/B 0x%x/0x%x!"
-		     "Email xen-devel@lists.xensource.com  Thank you.\n", \
-		     pm1a_cnt, pm1b_cnt);
+	if (WARN((val_a & (~0 << bits)) || (val_b & (~0 << bits)),
+		 "Using more than %u bits of sleep control values %#x/%#x!"
+		 "Email xen-devel@lists.xen.org - Thank you.\n", \
+		 bits, val_a, val_b))
 		return -1;
-	}
 
 	HYPERVISOR_dom0_op(&op);
 	return 1;
diff --git a/include/xen/acpi.h b/include/xen/acpi.h
index 8656055..7770b66 100644
--- a/include/xen/acpi.h
+++ b/include/xen/acpi.h
@@ -75,8 +75,7 @@ static inline int xen_acpi_get_pxm(acpi_handle h)
 	return -ENXIO;
 }
 
-int xen_acpi_notify_hypervisor_state(u8 sleep_state,
-				     u32 pm1a_cnt, u32 pm1b_cnd,
+int xen_acpi_notify_hypervisor_state(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a, u32 val_b,
 				     bool extended);
 
 static inline int xen_acpi_suspend_lowlevel(void)
diff --git a/include/xen/interface/platform.h b/include/xen/interface/platform.h
index c57d5f6..f1331e3 100644
--- a/include/xen/interface/platform.h
+++ b/include/xen/interface/platform.h
@@ -152,10 +152,11 @@ DEFINE_GUEST_HANDLE_STRUCT(xenpf_firmware_info_t);
 #define XENPF_enter_acpi_sleep    51
 struct xenpf_enter_acpi_sleep {
 	/* IN variables */
-	uint16_t pm1a_cnt_val;      /* PM1a control value. */
-	uint16_t pm1b_cnt_val;      /* PM1b control value. */
+	uint16_t val_a;             /* PM1a control / sleep type A. */
+	uint16_t val_b;             /* PM1b control / sleep type B. */
 	uint32_t sleep_state;       /* Which state to enter (Sn). */
-	uint32_t flags;             /* Must be zero. */
+#define XENPF_ACPI_SLEEP_EXTENDED 0x00000001
+	uint32_t flags;             /* XENPF_ACPI_SLEEP_*. */
 };
 DEFINE_GUEST_HANDLE_STRUCT(xenpf_enter_acpi_sleep_t);
 
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems

[Ben Guthro]

On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
> In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
> reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
> synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
> requested). Fix this, requiring a boolean parameter to be added to the
> hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.
>
> This requires adjusting TXT, but the adjustments only go as far as
> failing the extended mode call (since, looking at the TXT interface,
> there doesn't even appear to be precautions to deal with that
> alternative interface).
>
> The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
> v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
> git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
> Cc: Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>
> Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
> Cc: Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>
> Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>
> v2: Extend description to include reference to hypervisor side change
> v3: Split into multiple patches, separating subsystems
>     Remove bool parameters, in favor of u8
> v4: Remove linux/acpi.h dependencies
>     Further patch split to break out acpica from OSL
>     More bool vs u8 fixes
> v5: Fix build of consumers of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() interface change,
>     so intermediate builds of partial patch series will not fail.
> v6: Rebased to linux-pm linux-next branch
>     Added warning in tboot early return code
>     Added Reviewed-by lines
>
> Ben Guthro (5):
>   acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code
>   acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path
>   acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended
>     parameter
>   x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep
>   xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available

Rafael, Bob -

Is this version of the series something that you may consider taking?
If not - is there something specific you would like to see addressed?

Thanks for your time.


Ben

>
>  arch/x86/kernel/tboot.c          |    9 ++++++++-
>  drivers/acpi/acpica/hwesleep.c   |    7 +++++++
>  drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c    |    3 +--
>  drivers/acpi/osl.c               |   16 ++++++++--------
>  drivers/xen/acpi.c               |   26 +++++++++++++-------------
>  include/acpi/acpiosxf.h          |    6 ++++++
>  include/linux/acpi.h             |    9 +++------
>  include/xen/acpi.h               |    4 ++--
>  include/xen/interface/platform.h |    7 ++++---
>  9 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 1.7.9.5
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems

[Ben Guthro]

On 07/08/2013 09:10 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday, July 07, 2013 08:13:15 PM Ben Guthro wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
>>> reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
>>> synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
>>> requested). Fix this, requiring a boolean parameter to be added to the
>>> hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.
>>>
>>> This requires adjusting TXT, but the adjustments only go as far as
>>> failing the extended mode call (since, looking at the TXT interface,
>>> there doesn't even appear to be precautions to deal with that
>>> alternative interface).
>>>
>>> The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
>>> v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
>>> git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
>>> Cc: Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
>>> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>
>>> v2: Extend description to include reference to hypervisor side change
>>> v3: Split into multiple patches, separating subsystems
>>>     Remove bool parameters, in favor of u8
>>> v4: Remove linux/acpi.h dependencies
>>>     Further patch split to break out acpica from OSL
>>>     More bool vs u8 fixes
>>> v5: Fix build of consumers of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() interface change,
>>>     so intermediate builds of partial patch series will not fail.
>>> v6: Rebased to linux-pm linux-next branch
>>>     Added warning in tboot early return code
>>>     Added Reviewed-by lines
>>>
>>> Ben Guthro (5):
>>>   acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code
>>>   acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path
>>>   acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended
>>>     parameter
>>>   x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep
>>>   xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available
>>
>> Rafael, Bob -
>>
>> Is this version of the series something that you may consider taking?
>> If not - is there something specific you would like to see addressed?
> 
> Well, I'm afraid you need to give us some more time to process that,
> sorry.

My apologies - I know it is a busy time during the merge window. I did
not mean to seem impatient.

With the volume of things on the mailing list, I merely wanted to try to
avoid the series getting buried. If a week is too frequent to re-bump a
series, do you have a set of recommendations of how to best interact
with your workflow?

I'm just trying to balance people's time to review such things, with the
volume of the list.

Thanks for your time.

Ben

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Sunday, July 07, 2013 08:13:15 PM Ben Guthro wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
> > In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
> > reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
> > synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
> > requested). Fix this, requiring a boolean parameter to be added to the
> > hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.
> >
> > This requires adjusting TXT, but the adjustments only go as far as
> > failing the extended mode call (since, looking at the TXT interface,
> > there doesn't even appear to be precautions to deal with that
> > alternative interface).
> >
> > The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
> > v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
> > Cc: Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>
> > Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
> > Cc: Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>
> > Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> >
> > v2: Extend description to include reference to hypervisor side change
> > v3: Split into multiple patches, separating subsystems
> >     Remove bool parameters, in favor of u8
> > v4: Remove linux/acpi.h dependencies
> >     Further patch split to break out acpica from OSL
> >     More bool vs u8 fixes
> > v5: Fix build of consumers of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() interface change,
> >     so intermediate builds of partial patch series will not fail.
> > v6: Rebased to linux-pm linux-next branch
> >     Added warning in tboot early return code
> >     Added Reviewed-by lines
> >
> > Ben Guthro (5):
> >   acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code
> >   acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path
> >   acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended
> >     parameter
> >   x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep
> >   xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available
> 
> Rafael, Bob -
> 
> Is this version of the series something that you may consider taking?
> If not - is there something specific you would like to see addressed?

Well, I'm afraid you need to give us some more time to process that,
sorry.

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems

[Ben Guthro]

On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Ben Guthro <Benjamin.Guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 07/08/2013 09:10 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Sunday, July 07, 2013 08:13:15 PM Ben Guthro wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
>>>> reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
>>>> synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
>>>> requested). Fix this, requiring a boolean parameter to be added to the
>>>> hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.
>>>>
>>>> This requires adjusting TXT, but the adjustments only go as far as
>>>> failing the extended mode call (since, looking at the TXT interface,
>>>> there doesn't even appear to be precautions to deal with that
>>>> alternative interface).
>>>>
>>>> The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
>>>> v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
>>>> git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
>>>> Cc: Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
>>>> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>
>>>> v2: Extend description to include reference to hypervisor side change
>>>> v3: Split into multiple patches, separating subsystems
>>>>     Remove bool parameters, in favor of u8
>>>> v4: Remove linux/acpi.h dependencies
>>>>     Further patch split to break out acpica from OSL
>>>>     More bool vs u8 fixes
>>>> v5: Fix build of consumers of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() interface change,
>>>>     so intermediate builds of partial patch series will not fail.
>>>> v6: Rebased to linux-pm linux-next branch
>>>>     Added warning in tboot early return code
>>>>     Added Reviewed-by lines
>>>>
>>>> Ben Guthro (5):
>>>>   acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code
>>>>   acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path
>>>>   acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended
>>>>     parameter
>>>>   x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep
>>>>   xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available
>>>
>>> Rafael, Bob -
>>>
>>> Is this version of the series something that you may consider taking?
>>> If not - is there something specific you would like to see addressed?
>>
>> Well, I'm afraid you need to give us some more time to process that,
>> sorry.
>
> My apologies - I know it is a busy time during the merge window. I did
> not mean to seem impatient.
>
> With the volume of things on the mailing list, I merely wanted to try to
> avoid the series getting buried. If a week is too frequent to re-bump a
> series, do you have a set of recommendations of how to best interact
> with your workflow?

Rafael (et al.)

I never heard back on this point of how you prefer your workflow to
proceed - that is, if I haven't heard anything in a couple weeks -
should I try to re-bump the thread?

Since this was sent around the time of the merge window, I realize
there were other things to occupy people's time.
Now that rc2 is out - I'm hoping that the dust has settled a bit, such
that there may be a cycle, or two to review this series.

Thanks for your time

Ben

>
> I'm just trying to balance people's time to review such things, with the
> volume of the list.
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
> Ben
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday, July 22, 2013 08:44:08 AM Ben Guthro wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Ben Guthro <Benjamin.Guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 07/08/2013 09:10 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> On Sunday, July 07, 2013 08:13:15 PM Ben Guthro wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>>> In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
> >>>> reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
> >>>> synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
> >>>> requested). Fix this, requiring a boolean parameter to be added to the
> >>>> hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.
> >>>>
> >>>> This requires adjusting TXT, but the adjustments only go as far as
> >>>> failing the extended mode call (since, looking at the TXT interface,
> >>>> there doesn't even appear to be precautions to deal with that
> >>>> alternative interface).
> >>>>
> >>>> The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
> >>>> v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
> >>>> git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
> >>>> Cc: Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> >>>> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
> >>>> Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>
> >>>> v2: Extend description to include reference to hypervisor side change
> >>>> v3: Split into multiple patches, separating subsystems
> >>>>     Remove bool parameters, in favor of u8
> >>>> v4: Remove linux/acpi.h dependencies
> >>>>     Further patch split to break out acpica from OSL
> >>>>     More bool vs u8 fixes
> >>>> v5: Fix build of consumers of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() interface change,
> >>>>     so intermediate builds of partial patch series will not fail.
> >>>> v6: Rebased to linux-pm linux-next branch
> >>>>     Added warning in tboot early return code
> >>>>     Added Reviewed-by lines
> >>>>
> >>>> Ben Guthro (5):
> >>>>   acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code
> >>>>   acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path
> >>>>   acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended
> >>>>     parameter
> >>>>   x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep
> >>>>   xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available
> >>>
> >>> Rafael, Bob -
> >>>
> >>> Is this version of the series something that you may consider taking?
> >>> If not - is there something specific you would like to see addressed?
> >>
> >> Well, I'm afraid you need to give us some more time to process that,
> >> sorry.
> >
> > My apologies - I know it is a busy time during the merge window. I did
> > not mean to seem impatient.
> >
> > With the volume of things on the mailing list, I merely wanted to try to
> > avoid the series getting buried. If a week is too frequent to re-bump a
> > series, do you have a set of recommendations of how to best interact
> > with your workflow?
> 
> Rafael (et al.)
> 
> I never heard back on this point of how you prefer your workflow to
> proceed - that is, if I haven't heard anything in a couple weeks -
> should I try to re-bump the thread?

I don't think you need to.  I'm waiting for Bob's comments at this point.

Bob, do you have any objections agains the Ben's patches?

Rafael


> Since this was sent around the time of the merge window, I realize
> there were other things to occupy people's time.
> Now that rc2 is out - I'm hoping that the dust has settled a bit, such
> that there may be a cycle, or two to review this series.
> 
> Thanks for your time
> 
> Ben
> 
> >
> > I'm just trying to balance people's time to review such things, with the
> > volume of the list.
> >
> > Thanks for your time.
> >
> > Ben
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday, July 22, 2013 08:44:08 AM Ben Guthro wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Ben Guthro <Benjamin.Guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 07/08/2013 09:10 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> On Sunday, July 07, 2013 08:13:15 PM Ben Guthro wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>>> In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
> >>>> reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
> >>>> synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
> >>>> requested). Fix this, requiring a boolean parameter to be added to the
> >>>> hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.
> >>>>
> >>>> This requires adjusting TXT, but the adjustments only go as far as
> >>>> failing the extended mode call (since, looking at the TXT interface,
> >>>> there doesn't even appear to be precautions to deal with that
> >>>> alternative interface).
> >>>>
> >>>> The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
> >>>> v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
> >>>> git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
> >>>> Cc: Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> >>>> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
> >>>> Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>
> >>>> v2: Extend description to include reference to hypervisor side change
> >>>> v3: Split into multiple patches, separating subsystems
> >>>>     Remove bool parameters, in favor of u8
> >>>> v4: Remove linux/acpi.h dependencies
> >>>>     Further patch split to break out acpica from OSL
> >>>>     More bool vs u8 fixes
> >>>> v5: Fix build of consumers of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() interface change,
> >>>>     so intermediate builds of partial patch series will not fail.
> >>>> v6: Rebased to linux-pm linux-next branch
> >>>>     Added warning in tboot early return code
> >>>>     Added Reviewed-by lines
> >>>>
> >>>> Ben Guthro (5):
> >>>>   acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code
> >>>>   acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path
> >>>>   acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended
> >>>>     parameter
> >>>>   x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep
> >>>>   xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available
> >>>
> >>> Rafael, Bob -
> >>>
> >>> Is this version of the series something that you may consider taking?
> >>> If not - is there something specific you would like to see addressed?
> >>
> >> Well, I'm afraid you need to give us some more time to process that,
> >> sorry.
> >
> > My apologies - I know it is a busy time during the merge window. I did
> > not mean to seem impatient.
> >
> > With the volume of things on the mailing list, I merely wanted to try to
> > avoid the series getting buried. If a week is too frequent to re-bump a
> > series, do you have a set of recommendations of how to best interact
> > with your workflow?
> 
> Rafael (et al.)
> 
> I never heard back on this point of how you prefer your workflow to
> proceed - that is, if I haven't heard anything in a couple weeks -
> should I try to re-bump the thread?
> 
> Since this was sent around the time of the merge window, I realize
> there were other things to occupy people's time.
> Now that rc2 is out - I'm hoping that the dust has settled a bit, such
> that there may be a cycle, or two to review this series.

I've just replied to a [0/5] from a previous series, here:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=137493312722239&w=2

Thanks,
Rafael