Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190829091232.15065-1-kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908291351510.1938@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <793CCD4F-35E0-46B9-B5D4-3D3233BA5D35@canonical.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908292143300.1938@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908292225000.1938@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908292225000.1938@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
From:   Daniel Drake <drake@endlessm.com>
Date:   Fri, 30 Aug 2019 11:47:02 +0800
Message-ID: <CAD8Lp46vG2TEAareYnLNLACkLOoNmsvUoFS64e+zgNfq0DH6EA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFD] x86/tsc: Loosen the requirements for watchdog - (was
 x86/hpet: Disable HPET on Intel Coffe Lake)
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, harry.pan@intel.com,
        x86@kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>, Pu Wen <puwen@hygon.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Thomas,

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 5:38 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> So if we have to disable the HPET on Kaby Lake alltogether unless Intel
> comes up with the clever fix, i.e. poking at the right registers, then I
> think we should also lift the TSC watchdog restrictions on these machines
> if they are single socket, which they are as the affected CPUs so far are
> mobile and client types.
>
> Also given the fact that we get more and more 'reduced' hardware exposed
> via ACPI and we already dealt with quite some fallout with various related
> issues due to that, I fear we need to bite this bullet anyway anytime soon.

Thanks for the explanation here!

My experience in this area is basically limited to the clock-related
issues that I've sent your way recently, so I don't have deep wisdom
to draw upon, but what you wrote here makes sense to me.

If you can outline a testing procedure, we can test upcoming patches
on Coffee Lake and Kaby Lake consumer laptops.

Thanks,
Daniel