[PATCH RFC v3 01/21] ACPI: Only enumerate enabled (or functional) devices
Jonathan Cameron
Jonathan.Cameron at Huawei.com
Fri Jan 12 03:52:05 PST 2024
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:26:15 +0000
"Russell King (Oracle)" <linux at armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 10:19:49AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 14:39:25 +0000
> > Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron at Huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 20:47:31 +0100
> > > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw at rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Friday, December 15, 2023 5:15:39 PM CET Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 15:31:55 +0000
> > > > > "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux at armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 07:37:10PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 7:16 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael at kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 7:10 PM Russell King (Oracle)
> > > > > > > > <linux at armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I guess we need something like:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > if (device->status.present)
> > > > > > > > > return device->device_type != ACPI_BUS_TYPE_PROCESSOR ||
> > > > > > > > > device->status.enabled;
> > > > > > > > > else
> > > > > > > > > return device->status.functional;
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > so we only check device->status.enabled for processor-type devices?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yes, something like this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, that is not sufficient, because there are
> > > > > > > ACPI_BUS_TYPE_DEVICE devices representing processors.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm not sure about a clean way to do it ATM.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ok, how about:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > static bool acpi_dev_is_processor(const struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > struct acpi_hardware_id *hwid;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (device->device_type == ACPI_BUS_TYPE_PROCESSOR)
> > > > > > return true;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (device->device_type != ACPI_BUS_TYPE_DEVICE)
> > > > > > return false;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > list_for_each_entry(hwid, &device->pnp.ids, list)
> > > > > > if (!strcmp(ACPI_PROCESSOR_OBJECT_HID, hwid->id) ||
> > > > > > !strcmp(ACPI_PROCESSOR_DEVICE_HID, hwid->id))
> > > > > > return true;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > return false;
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and then:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (device->status.present)
> > > > > > return !acpi_dev_is_processor(device) || device->status.enabled;
> > > > > > else
> > > > > > return device->status.functional;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > Changing it to CPU only for now makes sense to me and I think this code snippet should do the
> > > > > job. Nice and simple.
> > > >
> > > > Well, except that it does checks that are done elsewhere slightly
> > > > differently, which from the maintenance POV is not nice.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe something like the appended patch (untested).
> > >
> > > Hi Rafael,
> > >
> > > As far as I can see that's functionally equivalent, so looks good to me.
> > > I'm not set up to test this today though, so will defer to Russell on whether
> > > there is anything missing
> > >
> > > Thanks for putting this together.
> >
> > This is rather embarrassing...
> >
> > I span this up on a QEMU instance with some prints to find out we need
> > the !acpi_device_is_processor() restriction.
> > On my 'random' test setup it fails on one device. ACPI0017 - which I
> > happen to know rather well. It's the weird pseudo device that lets
> > a CXL aware OS know there is a CEDT table to probe.
> >
> > Whilst I really don't like that hack (it is all about making software
> > distribution of out of tree modules easier rather than something
> > fundamental), I'm the CXL QEMU maintainer :(
> >
> > Will fix that, but it shows there is at least one broken firmware out
> > there.
> >
> > On plus side, Rafael's code seems to work as expected and lets that
> > buggy firwmare carry on working :) So lets pretend the bug in qemu
> > is a deliberate test case!
>
> Lol, thanks for a test case and showing that Rafael's approach is
> indeed necessary.
>
> Would your test quality for a tested-by for this? For reference, this
> is my current version below with Rafael's update:
Sure. This matches what I have.
Tested-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron at huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron at huawei.com>
>
> 8<====
> From: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel at armlinux.org.uk>
> Subject: [PATCH] ACPI: Only enumerate enabled (or functional) processor
> devices
>
> From: James Morse <james.morse at arm.com>
>
> Today the ACPI enumeration code 'visits' all devices that are present.
>
> This is a problem for arm64, where CPUs are always present, but not
> always enabled. When a device-check occurs because the firmware-policy
> has changed and a CPU is now enabled, the following error occurs:
> | acpi ACPI0007:48: Enumeration failure
>
> This is ultimately because acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration() returns
> true for a device that is not enabled. The ACPI Processor driver
> will not register such CPUs as they are not 'decoding their resources'.
>
> ACPI allows a device to be functional instead of maintaining the
> present and enabled bit, but we can't simply check the enabled bit
> for all devices since firmware can be buggy.
>
> If ACPI indicates that the device is present and enabled, then all well
> and good, we can enumate it. However, if the device is present and not
> enabled, then we also check whether the device is a processor device
> to limit the impact of this new check to just processor devices.
>
> This avoids enumerating present && functional processor devices that
> are not enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse at arm.com>
> Co-developed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw at rjwysocki.net>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel at armlinux.org.uk>
> ---
> Changes since RFC v2:
> * Incorporate comment suggestion by Gavin Shan.
> Changes since RFC v3:
> * Fixed "sert" typo.
> Changes since RFC v3 (smaller series):
> * Restrict checking the enabled bit to processor devices, update
> commit comments.
> * Use Rafael's suggestion in
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/5760569.DvuYhMxLoT@kreacher
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 11 ++++++++
> drivers/acpi/device_pm.c | 2 +-
> drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c | 2 +-
> drivers/acpi/internal.h | 4 ++-
> drivers/acpi/property.c | 2 +-
> drivers/acpi/scan.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 6 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> index 4fe2ef54088c..cf7c1cca69dd 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> @@ -626,6 +626,17 @@ static struct acpi_scan_handler processor_handler = {
> },
> };
>
> +bool acpi_device_is_processor(const struct acpi_device *adev)
> +{
> + if (adev->device_type == ACPI_BUS_TYPE_PROCESSOR)
> + return true;
> +
> + if (adev->device_type != ACPI_BUS_TYPE_DEVICE)
> + return false;
> +
> + return acpi_scan_check_handler(adev, &processor_handler);
> +}
> +
> static int acpi_processor_container_attach(struct acpi_device *dev,
> const struct acpi_device_id *id)
> {
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> index 3b4d048c4941..e3c80f3b3b57 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> @@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ int acpi_bus_init_power(struct acpi_device *device)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> device->power.state = ACPI_STATE_UNKNOWN;
> - if (!acpi_device_is_present(device)) {
> + if (!acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(device)) {
> device->flags.initialized = false;
> return -ENXIO;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c b/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
> index 23373faa35ec..a0256d2493a7 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
> @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ static int create_pnp_modalias(const struct acpi_device *acpi_dev, char *modalia
> struct acpi_hardware_id *id;
>
> /* Avoid unnecessarily loading modules for non present devices. */
> - if (!acpi_device_is_present(acpi_dev))
> + if (!acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(acpi_dev))
> return 0;
>
> /*
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/internal.h b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> index 866c7c4ed233..9388d4c8674a 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> @@ -62,6 +62,8 @@ void acpi_sysfs_add_hotplug_profile(struct acpi_hotplug_profile *hotplug,
> int acpi_scan_add_handler_with_hotplug(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler,
> const char *hotplug_profile_name);
> void acpi_scan_hotplug_enabled(struct acpi_hotplug_profile *hotplug, bool val);
> +bool acpi_scan_check_handler(const struct acpi_device *adev,
> + struct acpi_scan_handler *handler);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> extern struct dentry *acpi_debugfs_dir;
> @@ -107,7 +109,6 @@ int acpi_device_setup_files(struct acpi_device *dev);
> void acpi_device_remove_files(struct acpi_device *dev);
> void acpi_device_add_finalize(struct acpi_device *device);
> void acpi_free_pnp_ids(struct acpi_device_pnp *pnp);
> -bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct acpi_device *adev);
> bool acpi_device_is_battery(struct acpi_device *adev);
> bool acpi_device_is_first_physical_node(struct acpi_device *adev,
> const struct device *dev);
> @@ -119,6 +120,7 @@ int acpi_bus_register_early_device(int type);
> const struct acpi_device *acpi_companion_match(const struct device *dev);
> int __acpi_device_uevent_modalias(const struct acpi_device *adev,
> struct kobj_uevent_env *env);
> +bool acpi_device_is_processor(const struct acpi_device *adev);
>
> /* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Power Resource
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/property.c b/drivers/acpi/property.c
> index 6979a3f9f90a..14d6948fd88a 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/property.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/property.c
> @@ -1420,7 +1420,7 @@ static bool acpi_fwnode_device_is_available(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
> if (!is_acpi_device_node(fwnode))
> return false;
>
> - return acpi_device_is_present(to_acpi_device_node(fwnode));
> + return acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(to_acpi_device_node(fwnode));
> }
>
> static const void *
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/scan.c b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> index 02bb2cce423f..f94d1f744bcc 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> @@ -304,7 +304,7 @@ static int acpi_scan_device_check(struct acpi_device *adev)
> int error;
>
> acpi_bus_get_status(adev);
> - if (acpi_device_is_present(adev)) {
> + if (acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(adev)) {
> /*
> * This function is only called for device objects for which
> * matching scan handlers exist. The only situation in which
> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ static int acpi_scan_bus_check(struct acpi_device *adev, void *not_used)
> int error;
>
> acpi_bus_get_status(adev);
> - if (!acpi_device_is_present(adev)) {
> + if (!acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(adev)) {
> acpi_scan_device_not_enumerated(adev);
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -1913,11 +1913,6 @@ static bool acpi_device_should_be_hidden(acpi_handle handle)
> return true;
> }
>
> -bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct acpi_device *adev)
> -{
> - return adev->status.present || adev->status.functional;
> -}
> -
> static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler,
> const char *idstr,
> const struct acpi_device_id **matchid)
> @@ -1938,6 +1933,18 @@ static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler,
> return false;
> }
>
> +bool acpi_scan_check_handler(const struct acpi_device *adev,
> + struct acpi_scan_handler *handler)
> +{
> + struct acpi_hardware_id *hwid;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(hwid, &adev->pnp.ids, list)
> + if (acpi_scan_handler_matching(handler, hwid->id, NULL))
> + return true;
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> static struct acpi_scan_handler *acpi_scan_match_handler(const char *idstr,
> const struct acpi_device_id **matchid)
> {
> @@ -2381,16 +2388,38 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_clear_dependencies);
> * acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration - Check if the ACPI device is ready for enumeration
> * @device: Pointer to the &struct acpi_device to check
> *
> - * Check if the device is present and has no unmet dependencies.
> + * Check if the device is functional or enabled and has no unmet dependencies.
> *
> - * Return true if the device is ready for enumeratino. Otherwise, return false.
> + * Return true if the device is ready for enumeration. Otherwise, return false.
> */
> bool acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(const struct acpi_device *device)
> {
> if (device->flags.honor_deps && device->dep_unmet)
> return false;
>
> - return acpi_device_is_present(device);
> + /*
> + * ACPI 6.5's 6.3.7 "_STA (Device Status)" allows firmware to return
> + * (!present && functional) for certain types of devices that should be
> + * enumerated. Note that the enabled bit should not be set unless the
> + * present bit is set.
> + *
> + * However, limit this only to processor devices to reduce possible
> + * regressions with firmware.
> + */
> + if (device->status.functional)
> + return true;
> +
> + if (!device->status.present)
> + return false;
> +
> + /*
> + * Fast path - if enabled is set, avoid the more expensive test to
> + * check whether this device is a processor.
> + */
> + if (device->status.enabled)
> + return true;
> +
> + return !acpi_device_is_processor(device);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration);
>
More information about the linux-riscv
mailing list