The init code path has several exceptions where the module can decide not to load.
As CONFIG_X86_INTEL_PSTATE is generally set to Y, the return code is not reachable.
The initialization code is neither verbose of the reason why it did choose to prematurely exit.
This situation leads to a situation where its difficult for a user to determine,
on a given platform, why the driver didn't load properly.
This patch is about reporting to the user the reason/context of why the driver failed to load.
That is a precious hint when debugging a platform.
Signed-off-by: Erwan Velu <[email protected]>
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
index dd66decf2087..e1ae309923bf 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
@@ -2475,6 +2475,7 @@ static bool __init intel_pstate_no_acpi_pss(void)
kfree(pss);
}
+ pr_debug("ACPI _PSS not found\n");
return true;
}
@@ -2484,10 +2485,15 @@ static bool __init intel_pstate_no_acpi_pcch(void)
acpi_handle handle;
status = acpi_get_handle(NULL, "\\_SB", &handle);
- if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
+ if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
+ pr_debug("ACPI PCCH not found\n");
return true;
+ }
- return !acpi_has_method(handle, "PCCH");
+ status = acpi_has_method(handle, "PCCH");
+ if (!status)
+ pr_debug("ACPI PCCH not found\n");
+ return !status;
}
static bool __init intel_pstate_has_acpi_ppc(void)
@@ -2502,6 +2508,7 @@ static bool __init intel_pstate_has_acpi_ppc(void)
if (acpi_has_method(pr->handle, "_PPC"))
return true;
}
+ pr_debug("ACPI _PPC not found\n");
return false;
}
@@ -2539,8 +2546,10 @@ static bool __init intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(void)
id = x86_match_cpu(intel_pstate_cpu_oob_ids);
if (id) {
rdmsrl(MSR_MISC_PWR_MGMT, misc_pwr);
- if ( misc_pwr & (1 << 8))
+ if (misc_pwr & (1 << 8)) {
+ pr_debug("MSR_MISC_PWR_MGMT enabled\n");
return true;
+ }
}
idx = acpi_match_platform_list(plat_info);
@@ -2606,22 +2615,28 @@ static int __init intel_pstate_init(void)
}
} else {
id = x86_match_cpu(intel_pstate_cpu_ids);
- if (!id)
+ if (!id) {
+ pr_info("CPU ID is not in the list of supported devices\n");
return -ENODEV;
+ }
copy_cpu_funcs((struct pstate_funcs *)id->driver_data);
}
- if (intel_pstate_msrs_not_valid())
+ if (intel_pstate_msrs_not_valid()) {
+ pr_warn("Cannot enable driver as per invalid MSRs\n");
return -ENODEV;
+ }
hwp_cpu_matched:
/*
* The Intel pstate driver will be ignored if the platform
* firmware has its own power management modes.
*/
- if (intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists())
+ if (intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists()) {
+ pr_info("Platform already taking care of power management\n");
return -ENODEV;
+ }
if (!hwp_active && hwp_only)
return -ENOTSUPP;
--
2.20.1
Hey rafael,
Does the V6 looks good to you ?
Thanks,
Erwan,
Le 13/02/2019 à 13:21, Erwan Velu a écrit :
> The init code path has several exceptions where the module can decide not to load.
> As CONFIG_X86_INTEL_PSTATE is generally set to Y, the return code is not reachable.
> The initialization code is neither verbose of the reason why it did choose to prematurely exit.
>
> This situation leads to a situation where its difficult for a user to determine,
> on a given platform, why the driver didn't load properly.
>
> This patch is about reporting to the user the reason/context of why the driver failed to load.
> That is a precious hint when debugging a platform.
>
> Signed-off-by: Erwan Velu <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> index dd66decf2087..e1ae309923bf 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> @@ -2475,6 +2475,7 @@ static bool __init intel_pstate_no_acpi_pss(void)
> kfree(pss);
> }
>
> + pr_debug("ACPI _PSS not found\n");
> return true;
> }
>
> @@ -2484,10 +2485,15 @@ static bool __init intel_pstate_no_acpi_pcch(void)
> acpi_handle handle;
>
> status = acpi_get_handle(NULL, "\\_SB", &handle);
> - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> + pr_debug("ACPI PCCH not found\n");
> return true;
> + }
>
> - return !acpi_has_method(handle, "PCCH");
> + status = acpi_has_method(handle, "PCCH");
> + if (!status)
> + pr_debug("ACPI PCCH not found\n");
> + return !status;
> }
>
> static bool __init intel_pstate_has_acpi_ppc(void)
> @@ -2502,6 +2508,7 @@ static bool __init intel_pstate_has_acpi_ppc(void)
> if (acpi_has_method(pr->handle, "_PPC"))
> return true;
> }
> + pr_debug("ACPI _PPC not found\n");
> return false;
> }
>
> @@ -2539,8 +2546,10 @@ static bool __init intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(void)
> id = x86_match_cpu(intel_pstate_cpu_oob_ids);
> if (id) {
> rdmsrl(MSR_MISC_PWR_MGMT, misc_pwr);
> - if ( misc_pwr & (1 << 8))
> + if (misc_pwr & (1 << 8)) {
> + pr_debug("MSR_MISC_PWR_MGMT enabled\n");
> return true;
> + }
> }
>
> idx = acpi_match_platform_list(plat_info);
> @@ -2606,22 +2615,28 @@ static int __init intel_pstate_init(void)
> }
> } else {
> id = x86_match_cpu(intel_pstate_cpu_ids);
> - if (!id)
> + if (!id) {
> + pr_info("CPU ID is not in the list of supported devices\n");
> return -ENODEV;
> + }
>
> copy_cpu_funcs((struct pstate_funcs *)id->driver_data);
> }
>
> - if (intel_pstate_msrs_not_valid())
> + if (intel_pstate_msrs_not_valid()) {
> + pr_warn("Cannot enable driver as per invalid MSRs\n");
> return -ENODEV;
> + }
>
> hwp_cpu_matched:
> /*
> * The Intel pstate driver will be ignored if the platform
> * firmware has its own power management modes.
> */
> - if (intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists())
> + if (intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists()) {
> + pr_info("Platform already taking care of power management\n");
> return -ENODEV;
> + }
>
> if (!hwp_active && hwp_only)
> return -ENOTSUPP;
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:28 AM Erwan Velu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hey rafael,
>
> Does the V6 looks good to you ?
I've queued it up with some manual changes. No need to update.
Thanks,
Rafael
Le 14/02/2019 à 11:22, Rafael J. Wysocki a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:28 AM Erwan Velu <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hey rafael,
>>
>> Does the V6 looks good to you ?
> I've queued it up with some manual changes. No need to update.
Ok, cool. What kind of changes ?
I'd love to understand what I missed.
Thx,
Erwan
Le 14/02/2019 à 11:22, Rafael J. Wysocki a écrit :
> I've queued it up with some manual changes. No need to update.
As this could help troubleshooting platforms and as some commits like
the PSS one on Proliant servers were backported to stable, I would
surely make sense to backport it to the other stable.
I know this is only a trivial print patch but as my initial issue
started with some of the 4.14 serie, it could be nice to have it too.
Erwan,
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 4:18 PM Erwan Velu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Le 14/02/2019 à 11:22, Rafael J. Wysocki a écrit :
> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:28 AM Erwan Velu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hey rafael,
> >>
> >> Does the V6 looks good to you ?
> > I've queued it up with some manual changes. No need to update.
>
> Ok, cool. What kind of changes ?
Nothing fundamental:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=linux-next&id=076b862c7e4409d2dcacfda19f7eaf8d07ab9200
> I'd love to understand what I missed.
It's more about my preferences.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 5:42 PM Erwan Velu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Le 14/02/2019 à 11:22, Rafael J. Wysocki a écrit :
> > I've queued it up with some manual changes. No need to update.
>
> As this could help troubleshooting platforms and as some commits like
> the PSS one on Proliant servers were backported to stable, I would
> surely make sense to backport it to the other stable.
>
> I know this is only a trivial print patch but as my initial issue
> started with some of the 4.14 serie, it could be nice to have it too.
You can always request -stable to pick up a patch once it's got to the mainline.
I'm not going to mark it as -stable material, though, as it is not a
fix strictly speaking.