Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver"
diff mbox series

Message ID 1558026716-26053-1-git-send-email-anshuman.gupta@intel.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • Revert "ICL HACK: Disable ACPI idle driver"
Related show

Commit Message

Anshuman Gupta May 16, 2019, 5:11 p.m. UTC
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(-)

Comments

Aditya Swarup May 17, 2019, 9:59 p.m. UTC | #1
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
Saarinen, Jani May 20, 2019, 1:42 p.m. UTC | #2
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
Rodrigo Vivi May 21, 2019, 12:12 a.m. UTC | #3
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
Saarinen, Jani May 21, 2019, 6:14 a.m. UTC | #4
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
Jani Nikula May 21, 2019, 8:32 a.m. UTC | #5
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

Patch
diff mbox series

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);