On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 17:42:59 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:39 PM Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 17:23:36 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 7:35 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> >> >> Calling acpi_thermal_check() from acpi_thermal_notify() directly >> >> is problematic if _TMP triggers Notify () on the thermal zone for >> >> which it has been evaluated (which happens on some systems), because >> >> it causes a new acpi_thermal_notify() invocation to be queued up >> >> every time and if that takes place too often, an indefinite number of >> >> pending work items may accumulate in kacpi_notify_wq over time. >> >> >> >> Besides, it is not really useful to queue up a new invocation of >> >> acpi_thermal_check() if one of them is pending already. >> >> >> >> For these reasons, rework acpi_thermal_notify() to queue up a thermal >> >> check instead of calling acpi_thermal_check() directly and only allow >> >> one thermal check to be pending at a time. Moreover, only allow one >> >> acpi_thermal_check_fn() instance at a time to run >> >> thermal_zone_device_update() for one thermal zone and make it return >> >> early if it sees other instances running for the same thermal zone. >> >> >> >> While at it, fold acpi_thermal_check() into acpi_thermal_check_fn(), >> >> as it is only called from there after the other changes made here. >> >> >> >> BugLink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208877 >> >> Reported-by: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@xxxxxxx> >> >> Diagnosed-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Well, it's been over a week since this was posted. >> > >> > Does anyone have any comments? >> >> Sorry, I haven't been able to make time to test the patch yet, but I'll >> try to do so this weekend. Is it just the patch below that I should >> apply, ignoring the previous patches you sent? > > Yes. > >> And can I apply it to the current mainline kernel? > > Yes, it should be applicable to the current mainline (at least as of 5.11-rc4). > > Thanks! I've now updated my local repo to 5.11.0-rc4+, installed your patch, rebuilt and installed the kernel, rebooted (without adding 'thermal.tzp=300' to the kernel command line), did some normal activity, then ran 'shutdown -h now', and the machine did just that. So your patch seems to have fixed the problem I reported. Many thanks! Steve Berman
