| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1458249167.3861.39.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:12:47 -0700
From: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
To: Linda Knippers <linda.knippers@....com>, rjw@...ysocki.net
Cc: tony.luck@...el.com, bp@...en8.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, lenb@...nel.org,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] acpi: Issue _OSC call for native thermal interrupt
handling
On Thu, 2016-03-17 at 16:51 -0400, Linda Knippers wrote:
>
> On 3/17/2016 4:36 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2016-03-17 at 16:03 -0400, Linda Knippers wrote:
> > >
> > > On 3/17/2016 2:24 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > There are several reports of freeze on enabling HWP (Hardware
> > > > PStates)
> > > > feature on Skylake based systems by Intel P states driver. The
> > > > root
> > > > cause is identified as the HWP interrupts causing BIOS code to
> > > > freeze.
> > > > HWP interrupts uses thermal LVT.
> > > > Linux natively handles thermal interrupts, but in Skylake based
> > > > systems
> > > > SMM will take control of thermal interrupts. This is a problem
> > > > for
> > > > several
> > > > reasons:
> > > > - It is freezing in BIOS when tries to handle thermal
> > > > interrupt,
> > > > which
> > > > will require BIOS upgrade
> > > > - With SMM handling thermal we loose all the reporting features
> > > > of
> > > > Linux arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt driver
> > > > - Some thermal drivers like x86-package-temp driver depends on
> > > > the
> > > > thermal
> > > > threshold interrupts
> > > > - The HWP interrupts are useful for debugging and tuning
> > > > performance
> > > >
> > > > So we need native handling of thermal interrupts.
> > > Is this working around a firmware bug?
> > Yes. But Linux always had capability to handle thermal interrupts
> > natively, so we should continue to have this in OS control, when
> > possible.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To inform SMM that
> > > > OS will handle thermal interrupts, we need to use _OSC under
> > > > processor
> > > > scope very early in ACPI initialization flow.
> > > Does _OSC say that OS "will" handle thermal interrupts or that it
> > > "can"
> > > handle thermal interrupts?
> > Can handle.
> >
> > >
> > > Couldn't a platform decide it wants to handle
> > > them, regardless of what the OS may be capable of?
> > >
> > Yes. In that case platform can change the delivery mode bits to SMM
> > in
> > LVT.
> And would still exhibit the BIOS bug?
>
Yes. But eventually BIOS bug will be fixed.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This needs to be done
> > > > before SMM code path looks for _OSC capabilities. The bit 12 of
> > > > _OSC in processor scope defines whether OS will handle thermal
> > > > interrupts.
> > > > When bit 12 is set to 1, OS will handle thermal interrupts.
> > > > Refer to this document for details on _OSC
> > > > http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/standards/processor-vend
> > > > or-
> > > > specific-acpi-specification.html
> > > Where is bit 12 documented?
> > >
> > In the above document.
> When I look at that document, I see bit 12 described as
> "If set, OSPM supports native interrupt handling for Collaborative
> Processor
> Performance Control notifications." Is that the same thing or am
> I looking at the wrong table?
Yes. If you look at section 14.4 in Intel SDM, you will see that
"HWP is an implementation of the ACPI-defined Collaborative Processor
Performance Control (CPPC)". Section 14.4.5 also specifies that HWP
uses IA32_THERM_STATUS to communicate if there are notifications, which
is notified via thermal interrupt.
You asked above if platform can handle these notification in SMM only.
If you do then the notification will arrive as ACPI notifications. We
don't have support for such notifications in Linux yet.
Thanks,
Srinivas
>
> -- ljk
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This change introduces a new function
> > > > acpi_early_processor_set_osc(),
> > > > which walks acpi name space and finds acpi processor object and
> > > > set capability via _OSC method to take over thermal LVT.
> > > Does this change just affect Skylake platforms or all platforms?
> > Any platform which has Intel ® Speed Shift Technology (aka HWP)
> > feature
> > present and enabled.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Srinivas
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > -- ljk
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Also this change writes HWP status bits to 0 to clear any HWP
> > > > status
> > > > bits in intel_thermal_interrupt().
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.i
> > > > ntel
> > > > .com>
> > > > ---
> > > > v4:
> > > > Suggestion by Boris for removing use of intermediate variable
> > > > for
> > > > clearing HWP status and using boot_cpu_has instead of
> > > > static_cpu_has
> > > >
> > > > v3:
> > > > - Added CONFIG_X86 around static_cpu_has() to fix compile error
> > > > on
> > > > ARCH=ia64, reported by kbuild test robot
> > > > - return AE_CTRL_TERMINATE to terminate acpi name walk space,
> > > > when
> > > > _OSC
> > > > is set already once.
> > > > v2:
> > > > Unnecessary newline was introduced, removed that in
> > > > acpi_processor.c
> > > >
> > > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c | 3 ++
> > > > drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 47
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > drivers/acpi/bus.c | 3 ++
> > > > drivers/acpi/internal.h | 2 ++
> > > > 4 files changed, 55 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c
> > > > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c
> > > > index 2c5aaf8..0553858 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c
> > > > @@ -385,6 +385,9 @@ static void intel_thermal_interrupt(void)
> > > > {
> > > > __u64 msr_val;
> > > >
> > > > + if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HWP))
> > > > + wrmsrl_safe(MSR_HWP_STATUS, 0);
> > > > +
> > > > rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_THERM_STATUS, msr_val);
> > > >
> > > > /* Check for violation of core thermal thresholds*/
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> > > > b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> > > > index 6979186..18da84f 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> > > > @@ -491,6 +491,53 @@ static void acpi_processor_remove(struct
> > > > acpi_device *device)
> > > > }
> > > > #endif /* CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU */
> > > >
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86
> > > > +static bool acpi_hwp_native_thermal_lvt_set;
> > > > +static acpi_status
> > > > acpi_set_hwp_native_thermal_lvt_osc(acpi_handle
> > > > handle,
> > > > + u32
> > > > lvl,
> > > > void *context,
> > > > + void
> > > > **rv)
> > > > +{
> > > > + u8 sb_uuid_str[] = "4077A616-290C-47BE-9EBD-
> > > > D87058713953";
> > > > + u32 capbuf[2];
> > > > + struct acpi_osc_context osc_context = {
> > > > + .uuid_str = sb_uuid_str,
> > > > + .rev = 1,
> > > > + .cap.length = 8,
> > > > + .cap.pointer = capbuf,
> > > > + };
> > > > +
> > > > + if (acpi_hwp_native_thermal_lvt_set)
> > > > + return AE_CTRL_TERMINATE;
> > > > +
> > > > + capbuf[0] = 0x0000;
> > > > + capbuf[1] = 0x1000; /* set bit 12 */
> > > > +
> > > > + if (ACPI_SUCCESS(acpi_run_osc(handle, &osc_context)))
> > > > {
> > > > + acpi_hwp_native_thermal_lvt_set = true;
> > > > + kfree(osc_context.ret.pointer);
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > + return AE_OK;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +void acpi_early_processor_set_osc(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HWP)) {
> > > > + acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_PROCESSOR,
> > > > ACPI_ROOT_OBJECT,
> > > > + ACPI_UINT32_MAX,
> > > > + acpi_set_hwp_native_therma
> > > > l_lv
> > > > t_osc,
> > > > + NULL, NULL, NULL);
> > > > + acpi_get_devices(ACPI_PROCESSOR_DEVICE_HID,
> > > > + acpi_set_hwp_native_thermal_l
> > > > vt_o
> > > > sc,
> > > > + NULL, NULL);
> > > > + }
> > > > +}
> > > > +#else
> > > > +
> > > > +void acpi_early_processor_set_osc(void) {}
> > > > +
> > > > +#endif
> > > > +
> > > > /*
> > > > * The following ACPI IDs are known to be suitable for
> > > > representing as
> > > > * processor devices.
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> > > > index 891c42d..7e73aea 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> > > > @@ -1005,6 +1005,9 @@ static int __init acpi_bus_init(void)
> > > > goto error1;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > + /* Set capability bits for _OSC under processor scope
> > > > */
> > > > + acpi_early_processor_set_osc();
> > > > +
> > > > /*
> > > > * _OSC method may exist in module level code,
> > > > * so it must be run after ACPI_FULL_INITIALIZATION
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/internal.h b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> > > > index 1e6833a..5c787ac 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> > > > @@ -138,6 +138,8 @@ void acpi_early_processor_set_pdc(void);
> > > > static inline void acpi_early_processor_set_pdc(void) {}
> > > > #endif
> > > >
> > > > +void acpi_early_processor_set_osc(void);
> > > > +
> > > > /* ---------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ----
> > > > -------------
> > > > Embedded Controller
> > > > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ----
> > > > ----------- */
> > > >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists