[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e9b4ae11-1fe3-a660-bb65-d3ba55ffcc56@amd.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 16:07:52 -0600
From: Wei Huang <whuang2@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Punit Agrawal <punitagrawal@...il.com>, rjw@...ysocki.net,
wei.huang2@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] cpufreq: acpi-cpufreq: Add processor to the
ignore PSD override list
On 12/7/20 2:26 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 02:20:55PM -0600, Wei Huang wrote:
>> In summary, this patch is fine if Punit already verified it. My only
>> concern is the list can potentially increase over the time, and we will
>> keep coming back to fix override_acpi_psd() function.
>
> Can the detection be done by looking at those _PSD things instead of
> comparing f/m/s?
Not I am aware of. I don't know the correlation between _PSD
configuration and CPU's f/m/s.
>
> And, alternatively, what is this fixing?
>
> So what if some zen2 boxes have correct _PSD objects? Why do they need
> to ignore the override?
I think we shouldn't override zen2 if _PSD is correct. In my opinion,
there are two approaches:
* Keep override_acpi_psd()
Let us keep the original quirk and override_acpi_psd() function. Over
the time, people may want to add new CPUs to override_acpi_psd(). The
maintainer may declare that only CPUs >= family 17h will be fixed, to
avoid exploding the check-list.
* Remove the quirk completely
We can completely remove commit acd316248205 ("acpi-cpufreq: Add quirk
to disable _PSD usage on all AMD CPUs")? I am not sure what "AMD desktop
boards" was referring to in the original commit message of acd316248205.
Maybe such machines aren't in use anymore.
>
> Hmmm?
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists