From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: raoxu <raoxu@uniontech.com>
Cc: lee@kernel.org, mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com,
mfd@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: intel-lpss: Clamp latency tolerance to the register value mask
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2026 23:39:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <avI9fDRmwFyIfTDv@ashevche-desk.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82545EC5E5ABC9F0+20261109094242.3783672-1-raoxu@uniontech.com>
On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 05:42:42PM +0800, raoxu wrote:
>
> The PM QoS latency tolerance interface accepts non-negative s32 values,
> but the LPSS active and idle LTR registers have only a ten-bit value
> field. intel_lpss_ltr_set() selects the larger scale for requests above
> 1023 us and ORs val >> 5 into the register without limiting its width.
>
> For a request of 32768 us, the shifted value is 1024 and the latency
> value field becomes zero. A request of 100000 us leaves only 53 in the
> value field. Still larger requests can set bits outside both the value
> and scale fields. Thus a relaxed latency request can produce a much
> stricter tolerance and unnecessarily restrict power saving.
>
> Clamp the shifted value to LPSS_PRIV_LTR_VALUE_MASK before combining it
> with LPSS_PRIV_LTR_SCALE_32US. This saturates oversized requests instead
> of wrapping the field, matching the Intel LTR handling in sdhci-pci.
> Negative values and PM_QOS_LATENCY_ANY retain their existing handling.
Shouldn't we rather forbid to apply wrong values?
> The supplied fix was reviewed and this commit message prepared with
> OpenCode AI assistance.
This paragraph should go after '---' line below.
> Fixes: 4b45efe85263 ("mfd: Add support for Intel Sunrisepoint LPSS devices")
> Signed-off-by: Xu Rao <raoxu@uniontech.com>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> ---
...
> if (val > LPSS_PRIV_LTR_VALUE_MASK)
> - ltr |= LPSS_PRIV_LTR_SCALE_32US | val >> 5;
> + ltr |= LPSS_PRIV_LTR_SCALE_32US |
> + min_t(u32, val >> 5, LPSS_PRIV_LTR_VALUE_MASK);
No min_t() in a new code. You mentioned clamping, use clamp(),
it's exactly for that.
> else
> ltr |= LPSS_PRIV_LTR_SCALE_1US | val;
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-09 21:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-09 9:42 raoxu
2026-11-09 21:39 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2026-11-09 21:40 ` Andy Shevchenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=avI9fDRmwFyIfTDv@ashevche-desk.local \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mfd@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=raoxu@uniontech.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®