| Message ID | 1436892383-4217-1-git-send-email-kristen@linux.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | Rafael Wysocki |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 09:46:23 -0700 Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com> wrote: > HWP previously was only enabled at driver load time, on the boot > cpu, however, HWP must be enabled per package. Move the code to > enable HWP to the cpufreq driver init path so that it will be > called per cpu. > > Signed-off-by: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com> > Tested-by: David Zhuang <david.zhuang@oracle.com> Oops - don't apply this one yet please. I think I might have broken S3 resume. Sorry for the noise, Kristen > --- > drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 11 +++++++---- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c > index 15ada47..763d8f3 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c > @@ -484,12 +484,11 @@ static void __init intel_pstate_sysfs_expose_params(void) > } > /************************** sysfs end ************************/ > > -static void intel_pstate_hwp_enable(void) > +static void intel_pstate_hwp_enable(struct cpudata *cpudata) > { > - hwp_active++; > pr_info("intel_pstate: HWP enabled\n"); > > - wrmsrl( MSR_PM_ENABLE, 0x1); > + wrmsrl_on_cpu(cpudata->cpu, MSR_PM_ENABLE, 0x1); > } > > static int byt_get_min_pstate(void) > @@ -932,6 +931,10 @@ static int intel_pstate_init_cpu(unsigned int cpunum) > cpu = all_cpu_data[cpunum]; > > cpu->cpu = cpunum; > + > + if (hwp_active) > + intel_pstate_hwp_enable(cpu); > + > intel_pstate_get_cpu_pstates(cpu); > > init_timer_deferrable(&cpu->timer); > @@ -1245,7 +1248,7 @@ static int __init intel_pstate_init(void) > return -ENOMEM; > > if (static_cpu_has_safe(X86_FEATURE_HWP) && !no_hwp) > - intel_pstate_hwp_enable(); > + hwp_active++; > > if (!hwp_active && hwp_only) > goto out; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 1:58 AM, Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > Oops - don't apply this one yet please. I think I > might have broken S3 resume. > Hi, Kristen This patch will fix the S3 resume panic bug. We encountered panic on kernel without this patch applied last week. After this patch applied, each cpu will get a chance to re-enable HWP in intel_pstate_cpu_init, after resuming. Yu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 19:17:53 +0800 yu chen <yu.chen.surf@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 1:58 AM, Kristen Carlson Accardi > <kristen@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > Oops - don't apply this one yet please. I think I > > might have broken S3 resume. > > > > Hi, Kristen > This patch will fix the S3 resume panic bug. > We encountered panic on kernel without this patch applied last week. > After this patch applied, each cpu will get a chance to > re-enable HWP in intel_pstate_cpu_init, after resuming. > > Yu Ok. Rafael, would you mind applying the patch after all? False alarm :). Thanks, Kristen -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 07:41:45 AM Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote: > On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 19:17:53 +0800 > yu chen <yu.chen.surf@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 1:58 AM, Kristen Carlson Accardi > > <kristen@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Oops - don't apply this one yet please. I think I > > > might have broken S3 resume. > > > > > > > Hi, Kristen > > This patch will fix the S3 resume panic bug. > > We encountered panic on kernel without this patch applied last week. > > After this patch applied, each cpu will get a chance to > > re-enable HWP in intel_pstate_cpu_init, after resuming. > > > > Yu > > Ok. Rafael, would you mind applying the patch after all? False > alarm :). OK, queuing up for 4.3, thanks!
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c index 15ada47..763d8f3 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c @@ -484,12 +484,11 @@ static void __init intel_pstate_sysfs_expose_params(void) } /************************** sysfs end ************************/ -static void intel_pstate_hwp_enable(void) +static void intel_pstate_hwp_enable(struct cpudata *cpudata) { - hwp_active++; pr_info("intel_pstate: HWP enabled\n"); - wrmsrl( MSR_PM_ENABLE, 0x1); + wrmsrl_on_cpu(cpudata->cpu, MSR_PM_ENABLE, 0x1); } static int byt_get_min_pstate(void) @@ -932,6 +931,10 @@ static int intel_pstate_init_cpu(unsigned int cpunum) cpu = all_cpu_data[cpunum]; cpu->cpu = cpunum; + + if (hwp_active) + intel_pstate_hwp_enable(cpu); + intel_pstate_get_cpu_pstates(cpu); init_timer_deferrable(&cpu->timer); @@ -1245,7 +1248,7 @@ static int __init intel_pstate_init(void) return -ENOMEM; if (static_cpu_has_safe(X86_FEATURE_HWP) && !no_hwp) - intel_pstate_hwp_enable(); + hwp_active++; if (!hwp_active && hwp_only) goto out;