From: Thomas Renninger <email@example.com>
To: Andre Przywara <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <email@example.com>,
Andreas Herrmann <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <email@example.com>,
firstname.lastname@example.org, Matthew Garret <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Add quirk to disable _PSD usage on all AMD CPUs
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 13:40:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
On Monday, September 17, 2012 09:41:20 AM Andre Przywara wrote:
> On 09/15/2012 01:20 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> This was to overcome some nasty interaction between the Windows
> scheduler and their version of the ondemand governor.
Whoever is/was responsible for this, can you explain him/her that
this was a bad idea and why.
Is this part of a BKDG?
Can you point to a public spec and the exact wording of the
"Windows scheduler workaround" BIOS vendors shall do?
> + pr_info_once(PFX "overriding BIOS provided _PSD data\n");
The message shows up on nearly every platform wether a _PSD
function exists or not. This is wrong.
If it's _PSD info that should get ignored/overwritten, this should
be done where _PSD is obtained:
Are you sure that it will never make sense for AMD to make use of
If yes, then always ignoring might be an option.
If not, this might need a more specific check, e.g.:
- Latest Windows version support called via OSI interface?
Latest Windowses should/may not need this anymore?
- Check for Desktop CPUs that are affected by the bad spec?
Hm, as powernow-k8 never made use of _PSD, ignoring it for
now sounds like a good thing to do. Still the ignoring should get
moved to processor_perflib.c, best with a pointer or at least
a comment that _PSD can be dangerous on AMD platforms. At some
day _PSD may make sense for AMD platforms as well?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-17 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-04 8:28 [PATCH 0/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Move modern AMD cpufreq support to acpi-cpufreq Andre Przywara
2012-09-04 8:28 ` [PATCH 1/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Add support for modern AMD CPUs Andre Przywara
2012-09-04 8:28 ` [PATCH 2/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Add quirk to disable _PSD usage on all " Andre Przywara
[not found] ` <CACJDEmrOoZ_azqTrtfoGC-O=H0V=AHy8VExoFYYPhbUUx+7UAg@mail.gmail.com>
2012-09-17 7:41 ` Andre Przywara
2012-09-17 11:40 ` Thomas Renninger [this message]
2012-09-04 8:28 ` [PATCH 3/8 v2] cpufreq: Add warning message to powernow-k8 Andre Przywara
2012-09-04 8:28 ` [PATCH 4/8 v2] powernow-k8: delay info messages until initialization has succeeded Andre Przywara
2012-09-04 8:28 ` [PATCH 5/8 v2] ACPI: Add fixups for AMD P-state figures Andre Przywara
2012-09-04 8:28 ` [PATCH 6/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Add support for disabling dynamic overclocking Andre Przywara
2012-09-04 8:28 ` [PATCH 7/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Add compatibility for legacy AMD cpb sysfs knob Andre Przywara
2012-09-04 8:28 ` [PATCH 8/8 v2] cpufreq: Remove support for hardware P-state chips from powernow-k8 Andre Przywara
2012-09-05 13:46 ` [PATCH 0/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Move modern AMD cpufreq support to acpi-cpufreq Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-09-05 14:25 ` Thomas Renninger
2012-09-05 15:05 ` Andre Przywara
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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).