diff mbox series

[1/2] ACPI: PCC: replace wait_for_completion()

Message ID 20220920094500.11283-2-lihuisong@huawei.com (mailing list archive)
State Mainlined, archived
Headers show
Series ACPI: PCC: add waiting timeout and fix Tx done interface | expand

Commit Message

lihuisong (C) Sept. 20, 2022, 9:44 a.m. UTC
Currently, the function waiting for completion of mailbox operation is
'wait_for_completion()'.  The PCC method will be permanently blocked if
this mailbox message fails to execute. So this patch replaces it with
'wait_for_completion_timeout()'. And set the timeout interval to an
arbitrary retries on top of nominal to prevent the remote processor is
slow to respond to PCC commands.

Fixes: 77e2a04745ff ("ACPI: PCC: Implement OperationRegion handler for the PCC Type 3 subtype")

Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpi_pcc.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Sudeep Holla Sept. 21, 2022, 3:47 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 05:44:59PM +0800, Huisong Li wrote:
> Currently, the function waiting for completion of mailbox operation is
> 'wait_for_completion()'.  The PCC method will be permanently blocked if
> this mailbox message fails to execute. So this patch replaces it with
> 'wait_for_completion_timeout()'. And set the timeout interval to an
> arbitrary retries on top of nominal to prevent the remote processor is
> slow to respond to PCC commands.
>

Sounds good to me. The only concern(may be not serious) is what happens
if we receive response from the platform after the timeout. I have tested
for that in non ACPI non PCC context. I don't have a setup to trigger that
with ACPI PCC + this patch to test. Other than that, I am fine with this:

Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
lihuisong (C) Sept. 22, 2022, 2:29 a.m. UTC | #2
在 2022/9/21 23:47, Sudeep Holla 写道:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 05:44:59PM +0800, Huisong Li wrote:
>> Currently, the function waiting for completion of mailbox operation is
>> 'wait_for_completion()'.  The PCC method will be permanently blocked if
>> this mailbox message fails to execute. So this patch replaces it with
>> 'wait_for_completion_timeout()'. And set the timeout interval to an
>> arbitrary retries on top of nominal to prevent the remote processor is
>> slow to respond to PCC commands.
>>
> Sounds good to me. The only concern(may be not serious) is what happens
> if we receive response from the platform after the timeout. I have tested
If OS still cann't receive response in noramal latency(must be filled 
accurately
as protocol said) + retries, there is a high probability that an 
exception occurs.
Even if we receive response after the timeout, I think there may be no 
impact,
but the response data in PCC share memory is ignored.
> for that in non ACPI non PCC context. I don't have a setup to trigger that
> with ACPI PCC + this patch to test. Other than that, I am fine with this:
>
> Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_pcc.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_pcc.c
index a12b55d81209..a1052fe998bf 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_pcc.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_pcc.c
@@ -23,6 +23,12 @@ 
 
 #include <acpi/pcc.h>
 
+/*
+ * Arbitrary retries in case the remote processor is slow to respond
+ * to PCC commands
+ */
+#define PCC_CMD_WAIT_RETRIES_NUM	500
+
 struct pcc_data {
 	struct pcc_mbox_chan *pcc_chan;
 	void __iomem *pcc_comm_addr;
@@ -86,6 +92,7 @@  acpi_pcc_address_space_handler(u32 function, acpi_physical_address addr,
 {
 	int ret;
 	struct pcc_data *data = region_context;
+	u64 usecs_lat;
 
 	reinit_completion(&data->done);
 
@@ -96,8 +103,20 @@  acpi_pcc_address_space_handler(u32 function, acpi_physical_address addr,
 	if (ret < 0)
 		return AE_ERROR;
 
-	if (data->pcc_chan->mchan->mbox->txdone_irq)
-		wait_for_completion(&data->done);
+	if (data->pcc_chan->mchan->mbox->txdone_irq) {
+		/*
+		 * pcc_chan->latency is just a Nominal value. In reality the remote
+		 * processor could be much slower to reply. So add an arbitrary
+		 * amount of wait on top of Nominal.
+		 */
+		usecs_lat = PCC_CMD_WAIT_RETRIES_NUM * data->pcc_chan->latency;
+		ret = wait_for_completion_timeout(&data->done,
+						  usecs_to_jiffies(usecs_lat));
+		if (ret == 0) {
+			pr_err("PCC command executed timeout!\n");
+			return AE_TIME;
+		}
+	}
 
 	mbox_client_txdone(data->pcc_chan->mchan, ret);