| Message ID | 1357780161-30581-1-git-send-email-Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | RFC, archived |
| Headers | show |
+ Andre. On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 07:09:21PM -0600, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote: > This patch is in reference to bug#:51741. (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51741) > powernow-k8 falls back to acpi-cpufreq if CPU is not supported. However, it states that acpi-cpufreq > has taken over even if acpi-cpufreq is not compiled in. This patch rewords the warning message to > clarify that the CPU is unsupported and prints a warning message when there is no acpi-cpufreq > present. > > Signed-off-by: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c | 10 +++++++++- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c > index 056faf6..6fa58b4 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c > @@ -1256,7 +1256,15 @@ static int __cpuinit powernowk8_init(void) > int rv; > > if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE)) { > - pr_warn(PFX "this CPU is not supported anymore, using acpi-cpufreq instead.\n"); > + pr_warn(PFX > + "this CPU is not supported anymore, use acpi-cpufreq instead" > + "Look for message from acpi-cpufreq to ensure it is loaded." > + ".\n"); > +#ifndef CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ > + pr_warn(PFX "acpi-cpufreq is disabled." > + "Enable it in the config options to get frequency scaling.\n"); > + return -ENODEV; > +#endif > request_module("acpi-cpufreq"); > return -ENODEV; Ok, the suggestion in that BZ is valid and something needs to be done for that case but I don't think that simply warning the user about it is enough. First of all, CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8 should depend on CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ since powernow-k8.ko requests that module. Then, having that dependency out of the way, we can almost safely request_module("acpi-cpufreq"). However, we can also check the return value of that function to make sure loading went fine. And finally, we should check that acpi-cpufreq actually registered properly and wasn't unloaded later for some other reason which wasn't signalled through request_module retval. Andre, I'm not sure about the details of that last one but the first two are easy. Any ideas, since you've been looking at acpi-cpufreq code lately? Thanks.
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c index 056faf6..6fa58b4 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c @@ -1256,7 +1256,15 @@ static int __cpuinit powernowk8_init(void) int rv; if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE)) { - pr_warn(PFX "this CPU is not supported anymore, using acpi-cpufreq instead.\n"); + pr_warn(PFX + "this CPU is not supported anymore, use acpi-cpufreq instead" + "Look for message from acpi-cpufreq to ensure it is loaded." + ".\n"); +#ifndef CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ + pr_warn(PFX "acpi-cpufreq is disabled." + "Enable it in the config options to get frequency scaling.\n"); + return -ENODEV; +#endif request_module("acpi-cpufreq"); return -ENODEV; }
This patch is in reference to bug#:51741. (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51741) powernow-k8 falls back to acpi-cpufreq if CPU is not supported. However, it states that acpi-cpufreq has taken over even if acpi-cpufreq is not compiled in. This patch rewords the warning message to clarify that the CPU is unsupported and prints a warning message when there is no acpi-cpufreq present. Signed-off-by: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com> --- drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c | 10 +++++++++- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)