On Thursday, December 04, 2014 06:03:05 PM Linda Knippers wrote:
> On 12/4/2014 5:38 PM, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 23:10:58 +0100
> > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thursday, December 04, 2014 11:07:31 AM Ethan Zhao wrote:
> >>> To force loading on Oracle Sun X86 servers, provide one kernel command line
> >>> parameter
> >>>
> >>> intel_pstate = ora_force
> >>
> >> I would suggest to change the name of the option to "oracle_force" or "sun_force"
> >> for clarity.
> >>
> >> Anyway, I need an ACK from Kristen if this patch is to be applied.
> >>
> >>> For those who be aware of the risk of no power capping capabily working and
> >>> try to get better performance with this driver.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Ethan Zhao <ethan.zhao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> v2: change to hardware vendor specific naming parameter.
> >>> v4: refine code and doc.
> >>> v5&v6: fix a typo in doc.
> >>> v7: change enum PCC to PPC.
> >>>
> >>> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 5 +++++
> >>> drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 6 +++++-
> >>> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> >>> index 479f332..7d0983e 100644
> >>> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> >>> @@ -1446,6 +1446,11 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be entirely omitted.
> >>> disable
> >>> Do not enable intel_pstate as the default
> >>> scaling driver for the supported processors
> >>> + ora_force
> >>> + Force loading intel_pstate on Oracle Sun Servers(X86).
> >>> + only for those who be aware of the risk of no power capping
> >>> + capability working and try to get better performance with this
> >>> + driver.
> >>
> >> That is not sufficiently clear. What does "risk of no power capping capability
> >> working" mean, in particular?
> >>
> >>>
> >>> intremap= [X86-64, Intel-IOMMU]
> >>> on enable Interrupt Remapping (default)
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> >>> index 1bb62ca..2654e13 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> >>> @@ -866,6 +866,7 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver intel_pstate_driver = {
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> static int __initdata no_load;
> >>> +static unsigned int ora_force;
> >>>
> >>> static int intel_pstate_msrs_not_valid(void)
> >>> {
> >>> @@ -1003,7 +1004,8 @@ static bool intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(void)
> >>> case PSS:
> >>> return intel_pstate_no_acpi_pss();
> >>> case PPC:
> >>> - return intel_pstate_has_acpi_ppc();
> >>> + return intel_pstate_has_acpi_ppc() &&
> >>> + (!ora_force);
> >>> }
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> @@ -1078,6 +1080,8 @@ static int __init intel_pstate_setup(char *str)
> >>>
> >>> if (!strcmp(str, "disable"))
> >>> no_load = 1;
> >>> + if (!strcmp(str, "ora_force"))
> >>> + ora_force = 1;
> >>> return 0;
> >>> }
> >>> early_param("intel_pstate", intel_pstate_setup);
> >>
> >> And can anyone please remind me what was wrong with a "force" option that would
> >> work for everyone, not just Oracle/Sun?
> >>
> >
> > That was my suggestion as well (i.e. a parameter to bypass the vendor
> > checks), but Linda didn't like it. My personal opinion is that unless
> > it's generic, I don't really feel like having a force option solely for
> > oracle. I'm not convinced you want this for production machines, and I
> > think for debug purposes I don't want a vendor specific param.
>
> I'd be happy with it if it somehow disabled what the platform is doing,
> but it doesn't. I don't see the point of forcing intel_pstate if you
> can't force the platform to stop doing power management at the same time.
> Even if it's for test/debug purposes, I'm not sure what you're testing
> when you have dueling power management.
>
> The description would need to be different too since I think on
> ProLiant, power capping can happen at any time, even if the
> system is in OS control mode and the intel_pstate driver is
> loaded.
>
> Can anyone suggest a description for a force option that would
> make sense generically?
What about:
force
Enable intel_pstate on systems where it may cause problems to
happen due to conflicts with platform firmware attempting to
drive P-states by itself in certain situations (for thermal
control or power capping in general or other purposes).
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
