Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Sep 2022 20:53:29 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ACPI: processor idle: Practically limit "Dummy wait" workaround to old Intel systems | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> |
| |
On 9/22/2022 8:47 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > Old, circa 2002 chipsets have a bug: they don't go idle when they are > supposed to. So, a workaround was added to slow the CPU down and > ensure that the CPU waits a bit for the chipset to actually go idle. > This workaround is ancient and has been in place in some form since > the original kernel ACPI implementation. > > But, this workaround is very painful on modern systems. The "inl()" > can take thousands of cycles (see Link: for some more detailed > numbers and some fun kernel archaeology). > > First and foremost, modern systems should not be using this code. > Typical Intel systems have not used it in over a decade because it is > horribly inferior to MWAIT-based idle. > > Despite this, people do seem to be tripping over this workaround on > AMD system today. > > Limit the "dummy wait" workaround to Intel systems. Keep Modern AMD > systems from tripping over the workaround. Remotely modern Intel > systems use intel_idle instead of this code and will, in practice, > remain unaffected by the dummy wait. > > Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> > Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> > Cc: Mario Limonciello <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> > Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > Reported-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220921063638.2489-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com/
Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
or do you want me to pick this up?
> --- > drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > index 16a1663d02d4..9f40917c49ef 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > @@ -531,10 +531,27 @@ static void wait_for_freeze(void) > /* No delay is needed if we are in guest */ > if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)) > return; > + /* > + * Modern (>=Nehalem) Intel systems use ACPI via intel_idle, > + * not this code. Assume that any Intel systems using this > + * are ancient and may need the dummy wait. This also assumes > + * that the motivating chipset issue was Intel-only. > + */ > + if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_INTEL) > + return; > #endif > - /* Dummy wait op - must do something useless after P_LVL2 read > - because chipsets cannot guarantee that STPCLK# signal > - gets asserted in time to freeze execution properly. */ > + /* > + * Dummy wait op - must do something useless after P_LVL2 read > + * because chipsets cannot guarantee that STPCLK# signal gets > + * asserted in time to freeze execution properly > + * > + * This workaround has been in place since the original ACPI > + * implementation was merged, circa 2002. > + * > + * If a profile is pointing to this instruction, please first > + * consider moving your system to a more modern idle > + * mechanism. > + */ > inl(acpi_gbl_FADT.xpm_timer_block.address); > } >
| |