From: "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<x86@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"open list:SUSPEND TO RAM" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Don't add CPUs that are not online capable
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 13:30:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c0af820a-9732-e67d-4697-4233783f3781@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0gip6L0cDxUJq-LsG4khmS0QW=xs5jAQr+OY6i28XBnwg@mail.gmail.com>
On 9/13/2021 12:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 11:41 PM Mario Limonciello
> <mario.limonciello@amd.com> wrote:
>>
>> A number of systems are showing "hotplug capable" CPUs when they
>> are not really hotpluggable. This is because the MADT has extra
>> CPU entries to support different CPUs that may be inserted into
>> the socket with different numbers of cores.
>>
>> Starting with ACPI 6.3 the spec has an Online Capable bit in the
>> MADT used to determine whether or not a CPU is hotplug capable
>> when the enabled bit is not set.
>>
>> Link: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuefi.org%2Fhtmlspecs%2FACPI_Spec_6_4_html%2F05_ACPI_Software_Programming_Model%2FACPI_Software_Programming_Model.html%3F%23local-apic-flags&data=04%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7C081016240ab94e72822d08d976db3d0a%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637671506287828485%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=0vIs%2BDryYFVrtT1DvhU6Ke1BDJe%2BsIhbxPu94NeXRBo%3D&reserved=0
>> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
>
> I've added the patches in this series to my queue, but given what this
> one does, I think that it's a bit risky, because it exposes the kernel
> to a new category of possible platform firmware bugs.
>
Sounds good, appreciate the diligence.
> For this reason, I'd rather queue it up as 5.16 material (and of
> course x86 reviewer comments are welcome).
>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 9 +++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> Changes from v1 -> v2:
>> * Make the change only apply on ACPI 6.3 or later
>> Changes from v2 -> v3:
>> * Make acpi_support_online_capable static and only valid if CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC is defined
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
>> index e55e0c1fad8c..d915f01b582b 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
>> @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ int acpi_fix_pin2_polarity __initdata;
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
>> static u64 acpi_lapic_addr __initdata = APIC_DEFAULT_PHYS_BASE;
>> +static bool acpi_support_online_capable;
>> #endif
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC
>> @@ -138,6 +139,8 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_madt(struct acpi_table_header *table)
>>
>> pr_debug("Local APIC address 0x%08x\n", madt->address);
>> }
>> + if (madt->header.revision >= 5)
>> + acpi_support_online_capable = true;
>>
>> default_acpi_madt_oem_check(madt->header.oem_id,
>> madt->header.oem_table_id);
>> @@ -239,6 +242,12 @@ acpi_parse_lapic(union acpi_subtable_headers * header, const unsigned long end)
>> if (processor->id == 0xff)
>> return 0;
>>
>> + /* don't register processors that can not be onlined */
>> + if (acpi_support_online_capable &&
>> + !(processor->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED) &&
>> + !(processor->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ONLINE_CAPABLE))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> /*
>> * We need to register disabled CPU as well to permit
>> * counting disabled CPUs. This allows us to size
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-13 18:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-08 21:41 [PATCH v3 1/2] ACPICA: Add support for MADT online enabled bit Mario Limonciello
2021-09-08 21:41 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Don't add CPUs that are not online capable Mario Limonciello
2021-09-13 17:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-13 18:30 ` Limonciello, Mario [this message]
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=c0af820a-9732-e67d-4697-4233783f3781@amd.com \
--to=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@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
Powered by JetHome