* Chen Yu <yu.c.c...@intel.com> wrote:
> A bug is reported(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1227208)
> that, after resuming from S3, CPU is working at a low speed.
> After investigation, it is found that, BIOS has modified the value
> of THERM_CONTROL register during S3, changes it from 0 to 0x10,
> while the latter means CPU can only get 25% of the Duty Cycle,
> and this caused the problem.
>
> Simple scenario to reproduce:
> 1.Boot up system
> 2.Get MSR with address 0x19a, it should output 0
> 3.Put system into sleep, then wake up
> 4.Get MSR with address 0x19a, it should output 0(actual it outputs 0x10)
>
> Although this is a BIOS issue, it would be more robust for linux to deal
> with this situation. This patch fixes this issue by saving/restoring
> THERM_CONTROL(now called CLOCK_MODULATION) register on suspend/resume.
>
> Tested-by: Marcin Kaszewski <marcin.kaszew...@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.c...@intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/suspend_64.h | 1 +
> arch/x86/power/cpu.c | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/suspend_64.h
> b/arch/x86/include/asm/suspend_64.h
> index 7ebf0eb..b9f5591 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/suspend_64.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/suspend_64.h
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ struct saved_context {
> u64 misc_enable;
> bool misc_enable_saved;
> unsigned long efer;
> + unsigned long clock_modulation;
> u16 gdt_pad; /* Unused */
> struct desc_ptr gdt_desc;
> u16 idt_pad;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/power/cpu.c b/arch/x86/power/cpu.c
> index 9ab5279..f82577b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/power/cpu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/power/cpu.c
> @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ static void __save_processor_state(struct saved_context
> *ctxt)
> mtrr_save_fixed_ranges(NULL);
>
> rdmsrl(MSR_EFER, ctxt->efer);
> + rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_THERM_CONTROL, ctxt->clock_modulation);
So what your changelog fails to mention:
- You only add this code to the 64-bit kernel. Are 32-bit kernels not affected?
- the MSR read is done unconditionally. Is MSR_IA32_THERM_CONTROL available
architecturally and readable (and has sensible values) on all 64-bit capable
x86 CPUs that run this code path?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
