From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from canpmsgout10.his.huawei.com (canpmsgout10.his.huawei.com [113.46.200.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CC9B1B87C0; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 09:30:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.225 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762248657; cv=none; b=cpmDOLrM+CVuSR0rrpQ7xiJHMPuWmS0HP1Nwc4vbU/+8yNPIn/KGtWWnD2q/aPkDMjJHryZ9F2sd+TcFJ7ctsD55d5L03P3ZXb0WvWpwfteajRmmryUFrGViKj6uDYKg33Z3q8FuJGjwC4KBlaTN20XEcplGUD40GBze3ykpmRg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762248657; c=relaxed/simple; bh=y5IE2z0bh7a+V1TKaw55c+sRi7cS6OOkVVs3enJ9s9U=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=pBXecxVQojx/nerW0xI8XOkZcqPLbKP6kZNINIKUU7u1wG2lX20osAW9AO8meJ8VB0Dx8stRiwPaDuLtVsHPnFpzxO1+Mf4wYrBboGjdWFEOZ7aBYiGTj9qhm1jT1+4Y43eaPYy9v5qj5wdCbYys2+Inem32XPX3U45peqDsbME= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=h-partners.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=h-partners.com header.i=@h-partners.com header.b=hmSDJsJ/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.225 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=h-partners.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=h-partners.com header.i=@h-partners.com header.b="hmSDJsJ/" dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=h-partners.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=Es9bGyJrosDWdP55MX2T4q0zyC4k+N2oaH9yrCMdDlU=; b=hmSDJsJ/ssugUDNaoNURqe9ZEcn7it6KYIK6sQUnaRSD7Vcjcga7257plhuEmZqDywqX1/oiN yqt2QCJfLkIniF6ERCjnxNYW7NFJh6zhcDVK+wvNtkANw/W90XmPDU/Pn0qg19krlTv760urKlh TwCA3D+cNa15O7MBb7I6mqg= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.112]) by canpmsgout10.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4d137F03slz1K98d; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 17:29:13 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggemv705-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [10.3.19.32]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E21311402CC; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 17:30:45 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.112) by dggemv705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 17:30:45 +0800 Received: from [10.67.121.59] (10.67.121.59) by kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 17:30:45 +0800 Message-ID: <53a38563-1151-4e2d-8932-b5242c68bf62@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 17:30:44 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Mark the state as invalid if its entry method is illegal To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" CC: , , , , , , , , References: <20251103084244.2654432-1-lihuisong@huawei.com> <20251103084244.2654432-2-lihuisong@huawei.com> From: "lihuisong (C)" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.17) To kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.112) 在 2025/11/4 1:49, Rafael J. Wysocki 写道: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 9:42 AM Huisong Li wrote: >> According to ACPI spec, entry method in LPI sub-package must be buffer >> or integer. And the entry method is very key in cpuidle. So mark the state >> as invalid. >> >> Fixes: a36a7fecfe60 ("ACPI / processor_idle: Add support for Low Power Idle(LPI) states") >> Signed-off-by: Huisong Li >> --- >> drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c >> index 341825e8ac63..9f1040eac051 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c >> @@ -956,6 +956,9 @@ static int acpi_processor_evaluate_lpi(acpi_handle handle, >> lpi_state->entry_method = ACPI_CSTATE_INTEGER; >> lpi_state->address = obj->integer.value; >> } else { >> + pr_debug("Entry method of state-%d is illegal, disable it.\n", >> + state_idx); >> + lpi_state->flags = 0; > Why does lpi_state->flags need to be cleared, isn't it 0 already? Good point. Do we need to add debug log? > >> continue; >> } >> >> --