Skip to content

cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel

openanolis / cloud-kernel
1 年多 前同步成功

通知 161
Star 36
Fork 7
cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 29 9月, 2010 3 次提交
  3. 25 8月, 2010 5 次提交
    • R
      PCI: PCIe: Ask BIOS for control of all native services at once · 28eb5f27
      由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于 
      After commit 852972ac (ACPI: Disable
ASPM if the platform won't provide _OSC control for PCIe) control of
the PCIe Capability Structure is unconditionally requested by
acpi_pci_root_add(), which in principle may cause problems to
happen in two ways.  First, the BIOS may refuse to give control of
the PCIe Capability Structure if it is not asked for any of the
_OSC features depending on it at the same time.  Second, the BIOS may
assume that control of the _OSC features depending on the PCIe
Capability Structure will be requested in the future and may behave
incorrectly if that doesn't happen.  For this reason, control of
the PCIe Capability Structure should always be requested along with
control of any other _OSC features that may depend on it (ie. PCIe
native PME, PCIe native hot-plug, PCIe AER).

Rework the PCIe port driver so that (1) it checks which native PCIe
port services can be enabled, according to the BIOS, and (2) it
requests control of all these services simultaneously.  In
particular, this causes pcie_portdrv_probe() to fail if the BIOS
refuses to grant control of the PCIe Capability Structure, which
means that no native PCIe port services can be enabled for the PCIe
Root Complex the given port belongs to.  If that happens, ASPM is
disabled to avoid problems with mishandling it by the part of the
PCIe hierarchy for which control of the PCIe Capability Structure
has not been received.

Make it possible to override this behavior using 'pcie_ports=native'
(use the PCIe native services regardless of the BIOS response to the
control request), or 'pcie_ports=compat' (do not use the PCIe native
services at all).

Accordingly, rework the existing PCIe port service drivers so that
they don't request control of the services directly.
Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: NJesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
      28eb5f27
    • R
      ACPI/PCI: Negotiate _OSC control bits before requesting them · 75fb60f2
      由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于 
      It is possible that the BIOS will not grant control of all _OSC
features requested via acpi_pci_osc_control_set(), so it is
recommended to negotiate the final set of _OSC features with the
query flag set before calling _OSC to request control of these
features.

To implement it, rework acpi_pci_osc_control_set() so that the caller
can specify the mask of _OSC control bits to negotiate and the mask
of _OSC control bits that are absolutely necessary to it.  Then,
acpi_pci_osc_control_set() will run _OSC queries in a loop until
the mask of _OSC control bits returned by the BIOS is equal to the
mask passed to it.  Also, before running the _OSC request
acpi_pci_osc_control_set() will check if the caller's required
control bits are present in the final mask.

Using this mechanism we will be able to avoid situations in which the
BIOS doesn't grant control of certain _OSC features, because they
depend on some other _OSC features that have not been requested.
Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: NJesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
      75fb60f2
    • R
      ACPI/PCI: Do not preserve _OSC control bits returned by a query · 2b8fd918
      由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于 
      There is the assumption in acpi_pci_osc_control_set() that it is
always sufficient to compare the mask of _OSC control bits to be
requested with the result of an _OSC query where all of the known
control bits have been checked.  However, in general, that need not
be the case.  For example, if an _OSC feature A depends on an _OSC
feature B and control of A, B plus another _OSC feature C is
requested simultaneously, the BIOS may return A, B, C, while it would
only return C if A and C were requested without B.

That may result in passing a wrong mask of _OSC control bits to an
_OSC control request, in which case the BIOS may only grant control
of a subset of the requested features.  Moreover, acpi_pci_run_osc()
will return error code if that happens and the caller of
acpi_pci_osc_control_set() will not know that it's been granted
control of some _OSC features.  Consequently, the system will
generally not work as expected.

Apart from this acpi_pci_osc_control_set() always uses the mask
of _OSC control bits returned by the very first invocation of
acpi_pci_query_osc(), but that is done with the second argument
equal to OSC_PCI_SEGMENT_GROUPS_SUPPORT which generally happens
to affect the returned _OSC control bits.

For these reasons, make acpi_pci_osc_control_set() always check if
control of the requested _OSC features will be granted before making
the final control request.  As a result, the osc_control_qry and
osc_queried members of struct acpi_pci_root are not necessary any
more, so drop them and remove the remaining code referring to them.
Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: NJesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
      2b8fd918
    • R
      ACPI/PCI: Make acpi_pci_query_osc() return control bits · ab8e8957
      由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于 
      Make acpi_pci_query_osc() use an additional pointer argument to
return the mask of control bits obtained from the BIOS to the
caller.
Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: NJesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
      ab8e8957
    • R
      ACPI/PCI: Reorder checks in acpi_pci_osc_control_set() · b879dc4b
      由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于 
      Make acpi_pci_osc_control_set() attempt to find the handle of the
_OSC object under the given PCI root bridge object after verifying
that its second argument is correct and that there is a struct
acpi_pci_root object for the given root bridge handle, which is
more logical than the old code.
Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Reviewed-by: NHidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: NJesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
      b879dc4b
  5. 15 8月, 2010 10 次提交
  7. 12 8月, 2010 1 次提交
    • T
      acpi: fix bogus preemption logic · 0a7992c9
      由 Thomas Gleixner 提交于 
      The ACPI_PREEMPTION_POINT() logic was introduced in commit 8bd108d1
(ACPICA: add preemption point after each opcode parse).  The follow up
commits abe1dfab, 138d1569, c084ca70 tried to fix the preemption logic
back and forth, but nobody noticed that the usage of
in_atomic_preempt_off() in that context is wrong.

The check which guards the call of cond_resched() is:

    if (!in_atomic_preempt_off() && !irqs_disabled())

in_atomic_preempt_off() is not intended for general use as the comment
above the macro definition clearly says:

 * Check whether we were atomic before we did preempt_disable():
 * (used by the scheduler, *after* releasing the kernel lock)

On a CONFIG_PREEMPT=n kernel the usage of in_atomic_preempt_off() works by
accident, but with CONFIG_PREEMPT=y it's just broken.

The whole purpose of the ACPI_PREEMPTION_POINT() is to reduce the latency
on a CONFIG_PREEMPT=n kernel, so make ACPI_PREEMPTION_POINT() depend on
CONFIG_PREEMPT=n and remove the in_atomic_preempt_off() check.

Addresses https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16210

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix build]
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Francois Valenduc <francois.valenduc@tvcablenet.be>
Cc: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      0a7992c9
  9. 11 8月, 2010 1 次提交
  11. 09 8月, 2010 3 次提交
  13. 07 8月, 2010 1 次提交
    • R
      ACPI / ACPICA: Fix reference counting problems with GPE handlers · 28f4f8a9
      由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于 
      If a handler is installed for a GPE associated with an AML method and
such that it cannot wake up the system from sleep states, the GPE
remains enabled after the handler has been installed, although it
should be disabled in that case to avoid spurious execution of the
handler.

Fix this issue by making acpi_install_gpe_handler() disable GPEs
that were previously associated with AML methods and cannot wake up
the system from sleep states.

Analogously, make acpi_remove_gpe_handler() enable the GPEs that
are associated with AML methods after their handlers have been
removed and cannot wake up the system from sleep states.  In addition
to that, fix a code ordering issue in acpi_remove_gpe_handler() that
renders the locking ineffective (ACPI_MTX_EVENTS is released
temporarily in the middle of the routine to wait for the completion
of events already in progress).

For this purpose introduce acpi_raw_disable_gpe() and
acpi_raw_enable_gpe() to be called with acpi_gbl_gpe_lock held
and rework acpi_disable_gpe() and acpi_enable_gpe(), respectively, to
use them.  Also rework acpi_gpe_can_wake() to use
acpi_raw_disable_gpe() instead of calling acpi_disable_gpe() after
releasing the lock to avoid the possible theoretical race with
acpi_install_gpe_handler().
Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>
Cc: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NLen Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
      28f4f8a9
  15. 03 8月, 2010 6 次提交
  17. 02 8月, 2010 1 次提交
  19. 31 7月, 2010 1 次提交
    • M
      ACPI: Disable ASPM if the platform won't provide _OSC control for PCIe · 852972ac
      由 Matthew Garrett 提交于 
      The PCI SIG documentation for the _OSC OS/firmware handshaking interface
states:

"If the _OSC control method is absent from the scope of a host bridge
device, then the operating system must not enable or attempt to use any
features defined in this section for the hierarchy originated by the host
bridge."

The obvious interpretation of this is that the OS should not attempt to use
PCIe hotplug, PME or AER - however, the specification also notes that an
_OSC method is *required* for PCIe hierarchies, and experimental validation
with An Alternative OS indicates that it doesn't use any PCIe functionality
if the _OSC method is missing. That arguably means we shouldn't be using
MSI or extended config space, but right now our problems seem to be limited
to vendors being surprised when ASPM gets enabled on machines when other
OSs refuse to do so. So, for now, let's just disable ASPM if the _OSC
method doesn't exist or refuses to hand over PCIe capability control.
Acked-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: NMatthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NJesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
      852972ac
  21. 27 7月, 2010 2 次提交
  23. 25 7月, 2010 1 次提交
  25. 23 7月, 2010 2 次提交
  27. 21 7月, 2010 1 次提交
  29. 13 7月, 2010 2 次提交