[AMD Official Use Only - General] Hi Peter: > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 9:24 PM > To: Meng, Li (Jassmine) <Li.Meng@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>; Huang, Ray > <Ray.Huang@xxxxxxx>; linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Shuah > Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-kselftest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > Fontenot, Nathan <Nathan.Fontenot@xxxxxxx>; Sharma, Deepak > <Deepak.Sharma@xxxxxxx>; Deucher, Alexander > <Alexander.Deucher@xxxxxxx>; Limonciello, Mario > <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxx>; Huang, Shimmer > <Shimmer.Huang@xxxxxxx>; Yuan, Perry <Perry.Yuan@xxxxxxx>; Du, > Xiaojian <Xiaojian.Du@xxxxxxx>; Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>; > Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/7] cpufreq: Add a notification message that the > highest perf has changed > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper > caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 09:51:13AM +0800, Meng Li wrote: > > ACPI 6.5 section 8.4.6.1.1.1 specifies that Notify event 0x85 can be > > emmitted to cause the the OSPM to re-evaluate the highest performance > > register. Add support for this event. > > > > Signed-off-by: Meng Li <li.meng@xxxxxxx> > > Link: > > https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/08_Processor_Configuration_and_Control > > .html?highlight=cppc#cpc-continuous-performance-control > > --- > > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 6 ++++++ > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > > include/linux/cpufreq.h | 5 +++++ > > 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c index 4bd16b3f0781..29b2fb68a35d > > 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ > > #define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_PERFORMANCE 0x80 #define > > ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_POWER 0x81 > > #define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_THROTTLING 0x82 > > +#define ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_HIGEST_PERF_CHANGED 0x85 > > > > MODULE_AUTHOR("Paul Diefenbaugh"); > > MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ACPI Processor Driver"); @@ -83,6 +84,11 @@ > > static void acpi_processor_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void > *data) > > acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event(device->pnp.device_class, > > dev_name(&device->dev), event, 0); > > break; > > + case ACPI_PROCESSOR_NOTIFY_HIGEST_PERF_CHANGED: > > + cpufreq_update_highest_perf(pr->id); > > + acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event(device->pnp.device_class, > > + dev_name(&device->dev), event, 0); > > + break; > > default: > > acpi_handle_debug(handle, "Unsupported event [0x%x]\n", event); > > break; > > I've obviously not read the link, but the above seems to suggest that every > CPU that has its limits changed gets the 'interrupt' ? [Meng, Li (Jassmine)] Yes. I will modify the link to https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/05_ACPI_Software_Programming_Model.html#processor-device-notification-values
