| Message ID | 1558026716-26053-1-git-send-email-anshuman.gupta@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver" | expand |
The patch looks fine to me. On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 10:41:56PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > This reverts commit 99b69db57544ec7ed427607f1a2a1858a7d43b61 > Core-for-CI:ICL_only Disable ACPI idle driver. > > This hack has been provided considering the Bug assessment > that ACPI idle driver page fault causes below bug. > FDO https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108840 > But this bug is still reproducible after disabling ACPI idle driver. > > It looks "rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU" causes to > hung kworker and followed by panic resulted this bug. > > Hence it make sense to revert this patch. > > Cc: martin.peres@intel.com > Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com > Cc: ville.syrjala@intel.com Reviewed-by: Aditya Swarup <aditya.swarup@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 18 +----------------- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > index ee842a2f..9d6aff2 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > @@ -35,12 +35,6 @@ > > #include <acpi/processor.h> > > -/* Only for Core-for-CI so don't want ia64 to fail compilation.*/ > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86 > -#include <asm/cpu_device_id.h> > -#include <asm/intel-family.h> > -#endif > - > #include "internal.h" > > #define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_PERFORMANCE 0x80 > @@ -64,13 +58,6 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id processor_device_ids[] = { > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, processor_device_ids); > > -#define ICPU(model) { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, X86_FEATURE_ANY, } > -static const struct x86_cpu_id intel_cpu_ids[] = { > - ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_MOBILE), /* ICL */ > - {} > -}; > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, intel_cpu_ids); > - > static struct device_driver acpi_processor_driver = { > .name = "processor", > .bus = &cpu_subsys, > @@ -239,7 +226,6 @@ static inline void acpi_pss_perf_exit(struct acpi_processor *pr, > static int __acpi_processor_start(struct acpi_device *device) > { > struct acpi_processor *pr = acpi_driver_data(device); > - const struct x86_cpu_id *id; > acpi_status status; > int result = 0; > > @@ -253,9 +239,7 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct acpi_device *device) > if (result && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS)) > dev_dbg(&device->dev, "CPPC data invalid or not present\n"); > > - id = x86_match_cpu(intel_cpu_ids); > - if (!id && (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == > - &acpi_idle_driver)) > + if (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == &acpi_idle_driver) > acpi_processor_power_init(pr); > > result = acpi_pss_perf_init(pr, device); > -- > 2.7.4 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
HI, > -----Original Message----- > From: Intel-gfx [mailto:intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of > Aditya Swarup > Sent: lauantai 18. toukokuuta 2019 1.00 > To: Gupta, Anshuman <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > Cc: Vetter, Daniel <daniel.vetter@intel.com>; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; > Syrjala, Ville <ville.syrjala@intel.com>; Peres, Martin <martin.peres@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver" > > The patch looks fine to me. > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 10:41:56PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > This reverts commit 99b69db57544ec7ed427607f1a2a1858a7d43b61 > > Core-for-CI:ICL_only Disable ACPI idle driver. > > > > This hack has been provided considering the Bug assessment that ACPI > > idle driver page fault causes below bug. > > FDO https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108840 > > But this bug is still reproducible after disabling ACPI idle driver. > > > > It looks "rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU" causes to hung > > kworker and followed by panic resulted this bug. > > > > Hence it make sense to revert this patch. > > > > Cc: martin.peres@intel.com > > Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com > > Cc: ville.syrjala@intel.com > > Reviewed-by: Aditya Swarup <aditya.swarup@intel.com> Are we now ok to merge this or? Chris, Ville? > > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 18 +----------------- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c index ee842a2f..9d6aff2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > @@ -35,12 +35,6 @@ > > > > #include <acpi/processor.h> > > > > -/* Only for Core-for-CI so don't want ia64 to fail compilation.*/ > > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86 -#include <asm/cpu_device_id.h> -#include > > <asm/intel-family.h> -#endif > > - > > #include "internal.h" > > > > #define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_PERFORMANCE 0x80 @@ -64,13 +58,6 @@ > > static const struct acpi_device_id processor_device_ids[] = { }; > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, processor_device_ids); > > > > -#define ICPU(model) { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, X86_FEATURE_ANY, } > > -static const struct x86_cpu_id intel_cpu_ids[] = { > > - ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_MOBILE), /* ICL */ > > - {} > > -}; > > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, intel_cpu_ids); > > - > > static struct device_driver acpi_processor_driver = { > > .name = "processor", > > .bus = &cpu_subsys, > > @@ -239,7 +226,6 @@ static inline void acpi_pss_perf_exit(struct > > acpi_processor *pr, static int __acpi_processor_start(struct > > acpi_device *device) { > > struct acpi_processor *pr = acpi_driver_data(device); > > - const struct x86_cpu_id *id; > > acpi_status status; > > int result = 0; > > > > @@ -253,9 +239,7 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct acpi_device > *device) > > if (result && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS)) > > dev_dbg(&device->dev, "CPPC data invalid or not present\n"); > > > > - id = x86_match_cpu(intel_cpu_ids); > > - if (!id && (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == > > - &acpi_idle_driver)) > > + if (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == > > +&acpi_idle_driver) > > acpi_processor_power_init(pr); > > > > result = acpi_pss_perf_init(pr, device); > > -- > > 2.7.4 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Intel-gfx mailing list > > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 01:42:35PM +0000, Saarinen, Jani wrote: > HI, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Intel-gfx [mailto:intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of > > Aditya Swarup > > Sent: lauantai 18. toukokuuta 2019 1.00 > > To: Gupta, Anshuman <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > > Cc: Vetter, Daniel <daniel.vetter@intel.com>; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; > > Syrjala, Ville <ville.syrjala@intel.com>; Peres, Martin <martin.peres@intel.com> > > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver" > > > > The patch looks fine to me. > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 10:41:56PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > > This reverts commit 99b69db57544ec7ed427607f1a2a1858a7d43b61 > > > Core-for-CI:ICL_only Disable ACPI idle driver. > > > > > > This hack has been provided considering the Bug assessment that ACPI > > > idle driver page fault causes below bug. > > > FDO https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108840 > > > But this bug is still reproducible after disabling ACPI idle driver. > > > > > > It looks "rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU" causes to hung > > > kworker and followed by panic resulted this bug. > > > > > > Hence it make sense to revert this patch. > > > > > > Cc: martin.peres@intel.com > > > Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com > > > Cc: ville.syrjala@intel.com > > > > Reviewed-by: Aditya Swarup <aditya.swarup@intel.com> > Are we now ok to merge this or? Chris, Ville? We shouldn't merge this. Instead we just need to go there and remove from topic/core-for-CI and force push with dim to rebuild drm-tip. If this is the wish from CI perspective, let's do it. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 18 +----------------- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > > b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c index ee842a2f..9d6aff2 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > > @@ -35,12 +35,6 @@ > > > > > > #include <acpi/processor.h> > > > > > > -/* Only for Core-for-CI so don't want ia64 to fail compilation.*/ > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86 -#include <asm/cpu_device_id.h> -#include > > > <asm/intel-family.h> -#endif > > > - > > > #include "internal.h" > > > > > > #define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_PERFORMANCE 0x80 @@ -64,13 +58,6 @@ > > > static const struct acpi_device_id processor_device_ids[] = { }; > > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, processor_device_ids); > > > > > > -#define ICPU(model) { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, X86_FEATURE_ANY, } > > > -static const struct x86_cpu_id intel_cpu_ids[] = { > > > - ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_MOBILE), /* ICL */ > > > - {} > > > -}; > > > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, intel_cpu_ids); > > > - > > > static struct device_driver acpi_processor_driver = { > > > .name = "processor", > > > .bus = &cpu_subsys, > > > @@ -239,7 +226,6 @@ static inline void acpi_pss_perf_exit(struct > > > acpi_processor *pr, static int __acpi_processor_start(struct > > > acpi_device *device) { > > > struct acpi_processor *pr = acpi_driver_data(device); > > > - const struct x86_cpu_id *id; > > > acpi_status status; > > > int result = 0; > > > > > > @@ -253,9 +239,7 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct acpi_device > > *device) > > > if (result && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS)) > > > dev_dbg(&device->dev, "CPPC data invalid or not present\n"); > > > > > > - id = x86_match_cpu(intel_cpu_ids); > > > - if (!id && (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == > > > - &acpi_idle_driver)) > > > + if (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == > > > +&acpi_idle_driver) > > > acpi_processor_power_init(pr); > > > > > > result = acpi_pss_perf_init(pr, device); > > > -- > > > 2.7.4 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Intel-gfx mailing list > > > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > > _______________________________________________ > > Intel-gfx mailing list > > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
HI, > -----Original Message----- > From: Vivi, Rodrigo > Sent: tiistai 21. toukokuuta 2019 3.12 > To: Saarinen, Jani <jani.saarinen@intel.com> > Cc: Swarup, Aditya <aditya.swarup@intel.com>; Gupta, Anshuman > <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>; Vetter, Daniel <daniel.vetter@intel.com>; intel- > gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Syrjala, Ville <ville.syrjala@intel.com>; Peres, Martin > <martin.peres@intel.com>; Wilson, Chris P <chris.p.wilson@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver" > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 01:42:35PM +0000, Saarinen, Jani wrote: > > HI, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Intel-gfx [mailto:intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org] On > > > Behalf Of Aditya Swarup > > > Sent: lauantai 18. toukokuuta 2019 1.00 > > > To: Gupta, Anshuman <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > > > Cc: Vetter, Daniel <daniel.vetter@intel.com>; > > > intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Syrjala, Ville > > > <ville.syrjala@intel.com>; Peres, Martin <martin.peres@intel.com> > > > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver" > > > > > > The patch looks fine to me. > > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 10:41:56PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > > > This reverts commit 99b69db57544ec7ed427607f1a2a1858a7d43b61 > > > > Core-for-CI:ICL_only Disable ACPI idle driver. > > > > > > > > This hack has been provided considering the Bug assessment that > > > > ACPI idle driver page fault causes below bug. > > > > FDO https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108840 > > > > But this bug is still reproducible after disabling ACPI idle driver. > > > > > > > > It looks "rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU" causes to hung > > > > kworker and followed by panic resulted this bug. > > > > > > > > Hence it make sense to revert this patch. > > > > > > > > Cc: martin.peres@intel.com > > > > Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com > > > > Cc: ville.syrjala@intel.com > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Aditya Swarup <aditya.swarup@intel.com> > > Are we now ok to merge this or? Chris, Ville? > > We shouldn't merge this. Instead we just need to go there and remove from topic/core-for-CI and force push with dim to rebuild drm-tip. Yes, this was my ask here, isnt't this change for reverting that from topic/core-for-CI (so basically remove) or no? > > If this is the wish from CI perspective, let's do it. If other players agree first. Ville, Chris? > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 18 +----------------- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > > > b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c index ee842a2f..9d6aff2 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > > > @@ -35,12 +35,6 @@ > > > > > > > > #include <acpi/processor.h> > > > > > > > > -/* Only for Core-for-CI so don't want ia64 to fail compilation.*/ > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86 -#include <asm/cpu_device_id.h> -#include > > > > <asm/intel-family.h> -#endif > > > > - > > > > #include "internal.h" > > > > > > > > #define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_PERFORMANCE 0x80 @@ -64,13 +58,6 > @@ > > > > static const struct acpi_device_id processor_device_ids[] = { }; > > > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, processor_device_ids); > > > > > > > > -#define ICPU(model) { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, > X86_FEATURE_ANY, } > > > > -static const struct x86_cpu_id intel_cpu_ids[] = { > > > > - ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_MOBILE), /* ICL */ > > > > - {} > > > > -}; > > > > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, intel_cpu_ids); > > > > - > > > > static struct device_driver acpi_processor_driver = { > > > > .name = "processor", > > > > .bus = &cpu_subsys, > > > > @@ -239,7 +226,6 @@ static inline void acpi_pss_perf_exit(struct > > > > acpi_processor *pr, static int __acpi_processor_start(struct > > > > acpi_device *device) { > > > > struct acpi_processor *pr = acpi_driver_data(device); > > > > - const struct x86_cpu_id *id; > > > > acpi_status status; > > > > int result = 0; > > > > > > > > @@ -253,9 +239,7 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct > > > > acpi_device > > > *device) > > > > if (result && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS)) > > > > dev_dbg(&device->dev, "CPPC data invalid or not present\n"); > > > > > > > > - id = x86_match_cpu(intel_cpu_ids); > > > > - if (!id && (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == > > > > - &acpi_idle_driver)) > > > > + if (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == > > > > +&acpi_idle_driver) > > > > acpi_processor_power_init(pr); > > > > > > > > result = acpi_pss_perf_init(pr, device); > > > > -- > > > > 2.7.4 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Intel-gfx mailing list > > > > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Intel-gfx mailing list > > > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > > _______________________________________________ > > Intel-gfx mailing list > > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On Tue, 21 May 2019, "Saarinen, Jani" <jani.saarinen@intel.com> wrote: > HI, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Vivi, Rodrigo >> Sent: tiistai 21. toukokuuta 2019 3.12 >> To: Saarinen, Jani <jani.saarinen@intel.com> >> Cc: Swarup, Aditya <aditya.swarup@intel.com>; Gupta, Anshuman >> <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>; Vetter, Daniel <daniel.vetter@intel.com>; intel- >> gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Syrjala, Ville <ville.syrjala@intel.com>; Peres, Martin >> <martin.peres@intel.com>; Wilson, Chris P <chris.p.wilson@intel.com> >> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver" >> >> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 01:42:35PM +0000, Saarinen, Jani wrote: >> > HI, >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Intel-gfx [mailto:intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org] On >> > > Behalf Of Aditya Swarup >> > > Sent: lauantai 18. toukokuuta 2019 1.00 >> > > To: Gupta, Anshuman <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> >> > > Cc: Vetter, Daniel <daniel.vetter@intel.com>; >> > > intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Syrjala, Ville >> > > <ville.syrjala@intel.com>; Peres, Martin <martin.peres@intel.com> >> > > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver" >> > > >> > > The patch looks fine to me. >> > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 10:41:56PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: >> > > > This reverts commit 99b69db57544ec7ed427607f1a2a1858a7d43b61 >> > > > Core-for-CI:ICL_only Disable ACPI idle driver. >> > > > >> > > > This hack has been provided considering the Bug assessment that >> > > > ACPI idle driver page fault causes below bug. >> > > > FDO https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108840 >> > > > But this bug is still reproducible after disabling ACPI idle driver. >> > > > >> > > > It looks "rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU" causes to hung >> > > > kworker and followed by panic resulted this bug. >> > > > >> > > > Hence it make sense to revert this patch. >> > > > >> > > > Cc: martin.peres@intel.com >> > > > Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com >> > > > Cc: ville.syrjala@intel.com >> > > >> > > Reviewed-by: Aditya Swarup <aditya.swarup@intel.com> >> > Are we now ok to merge this or? Chris, Ville? >> >> We shouldn't merge this. Instead we just need to go there and remove from topic/core-for-CI and force push with dim to rebuild drm-tip. > Yes, this was my ask here, isnt't this change for reverting that from topic/core-for-CI (so basically remove) or no? >> >> If this is the wish from CI perspective, let's do it. > If other players agree first. Ville, Chris? I threw the commit out of topic/core-for-CI. BR, Jani. > >> >> > >> > > >> > > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> >> > > > --- >> > > > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 18 +----------------- >> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-) >> > > > >> > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> > > > b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c index ee842a2f..9d6aff2 100644 >> > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> > > > @@ -35,12 +35,6 @@ >> > > > >> > > > #include <acpi/processor.h> >> > > > >> > > > -/* Only for Core-for-CI so don't want ia64 to fail compilation.*/ >> > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86 -#include <asm/cpu_device_id.h> -#include >> > > > <asm/intel-family.h> -#endif >> > > > - >> > > > #include "internal.h" >> > > > >> > > > #define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_PERFORMANCE 0x80 @@ -64,13 +58,6 >> @@ >> > > > static const struct acpi_device_id processor_device_ids[] = { }; >> > > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, processor_device_ids); >> > > > >> > > > -#define ICPU(model) { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, >> X86_FEATURE_ANY, } >> > > > -static const struct x86_cpu_id intel_cpu_ids[] = { >> > > > - ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_MOBILE), /* ICL */ >> > > > - {} >> > > > -}; >> > > > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, intel_cpu_ids); >> > > > - >> > > > static struct device_driver acpi_processor_driver = { >> > > > .name = "processor", >> > > > .bus = &cpu_subsys, >> > > > @@ -239,7 +226,6 @@ static inline void acpi_pss_perf_exit(struct >> > > > acpi_processor *pr, static int __acpi_processor_start(struct >> > > > acpi_device *device) { >> > > > struct acpi_processor *pr = acpi_driver_data(device); >> > > > - const struct x86_cpu_id *id; >> > > > acpi_status status; >> > > > int result = 0; >> > > > >> > > > @@ -253,9 +239,7 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct >> > > > acpi_device >> > > *device) >> > > > if (result && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS)) >> > > > dev_dbg(&device->dev, "CPPC data invalid or not present\n"); >> > > > >> > > > - id = x86_match_cpu(intel_cpu_ids); >> > > > - if (!id && (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == >> > > > - &acpi_idle_driver)) >> > > > + if (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == >> > > > +&acpi_idle_driver) >> > > > acpi_processor_power_init(pr); >> > > > >> > > > result = acpi_pss_perf_init(pr, device); >> > > > -- >> > > > 2.7.4 >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Intel-gfx mailing list >> > > > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Intel-gfx mailing list >> > > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Intel-gfx mailing list >> > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c index ee842a2f..9d6aff2 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c @@ -35,12 +35,6 @@ #include <acpi/processor.h> -/* Only for Core-for-CI so don't want ia64 to fail compilation.*/ -#ifdef CONFIG_X86 -#include <asm/cpu_device_id.h> -#include <asm/intel-family.h> -#endif - #include "internal.h" #define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_PERFORMANCE 0x80 @@ -64,13 +58,6 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id processor_device_ids[] = { }; MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, processor_device_ids); -#define ICPU(model) { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, X86_FEATURE_ANY, } -static const struct x86_cpu_id intel_cpu_ids[] = { - ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_MOBILE), /* ICL */ - {} -}; -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, intel_cpu_ids); - static struct device_driver acpi_processor_driver = { .name = "processor", .bus = &cpu_subsys, @@ -239,7 +226,6 @@ static inline void acpi_pss_perf_exit(struct acpi_processor *pr, static int __acpi_processor_start(struct acpi_device *device) { struct acpi_processor *pr = acpi_driver_data(device); - const struct x86_cpu_id *id; acpi_status status; int result = 0; @@ -253,9 +239,7 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct acpi_device *device) if (result && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS)) dev_dbg(&device->dev, "CPPC data invalid or not present\n"); - id = x86_match_cpu(intel_cpu_ids); - if (!id && (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == - &acpi_idle_driver)) + if (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == &acpi_idle_driver) acpi_processor_power_init(pr); result = acpi_pss_perf_init(pr, device);
This reverts commit 99b69db57544ec7ed427607f1a2a1858a7d43b61 Core-for-CI:ICL_only Disable ACPI idle driver. This hack has been provided considering the Bug assessment that ACPI idle driver page fault causes below bug. FDO https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108840 But this bug is still reproducible after disabling ACPI idle driver. It looks "rcu_preempt self-detected stall on CPU" causes to hung kworker and followed by panic resulted this bug. Hence it make sense to revert this patch. Cc: martin.peres@intel.com Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com Cc: ville.syrjala@intel.com Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> --- drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 18 +----------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-)