On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada
wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 15:11 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Monday, March 21, 2016 10:28:09 AM Stephane Gasparini wrote:
>> >
>> > —
>> > Steph
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:52 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada > > > v...
On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 15:11 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, March 21, 2016 10:28:09 AM Stephane Gasparini wrote:
> >
> > —
> > Steph
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:52 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada > > v...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:13 +0
On Monday, March 21, 2016 10:28:09 AM Stephane Gasparini wrote:
>
> —
> Steph
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:52 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:13 +0100, Stephane Gasparini wrote:
> >> Rafael,
> >>
> >> Why in step 3) both atom_set_pstate() and atom_s
On Monday, March 21, 2016 10:31:37 AM Stephane Gasparini wrote:
>
> —
> Steph
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 18, 2016, at 10:44 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Stephane Gasparini
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> —
> >> Steph
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6
—
Steph
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 10:44 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Stephane Gasparini
> wrote:
>>
>> —
>> Steph
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:52 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:13 +0100, Stephane Gasparin
—
Steph
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:52 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:13 +0100, Stephane Gasparini wrote:
>> Rafael,
>>
>> Why in step 3) both atom_set_pstate() and atom_set_pstate() were not
>> both
>> changed to use wrmsrl ?
> Initial Atom support was experimen
Hi,
The wmsrl is supposed to write on the MSR corresponding to the cpu that
is executing it.
However, it seems that the following commit done by Joe Konno already
fixed this bug on BYT.
0dd23f94251f49da99a6cbfb22418b2d757d77d6
Now, we need to figure out why the wmsrl is not executed on the
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, March 18, 2016 08:37:15 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
>> wrote:
>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2016 12:44:54 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Rafael J. Wy
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2016 09:02:29 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> Hello,
>
> Hi,
>
>> I have an Intel Atom based NUC that is producing the following
>> backtraces on boot of Linus' tree as of last evening. This does not
>> happen with a tree
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 09:02:29 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> Hello,
Hi,
> I have an Intel Atom based NUC that is producing the following
> backtraces on boot of Linus' tree as of last evening. This does not
> happen with a tree with top level commit 271ecc5253e2, but does happen
> when using the
—
Steph
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:52 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:13 +0100, Stephane Gasparini wrote:
>> Rafael,
>>
>> Why in step 3) both atom_set_pstate() and atom_set_pstate() were not
>> both
>> changed to use wrmsrl ?
> Initial Atom support was experimen
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 12:44:54 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki
> wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 17, 2016 09:02:29 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >> I have an Intel Atom based NUC that is producing the following
> >> backtraces on
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Stephane Gasparini
wrote:
>
> —
> Steph
>
>
>
>
>> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:52 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:13 +0100, Stephane Gasparini wrote:
>>> Rafael,
>>>
>>> Why in step 3) both atom_set_pstate() and atom_set_pstate() were n
Hello,
I have an Intel Atom based NUC that is producing the following
backtraces on boot of Linus' tree as of last evening. This does not
happen with a tree with top level commit 271ecc5253e2, but does happen
when using the tree mentioned in the subject with top level commit
63e30271b04c.
The fi
On Friday, March 18, 2016 08:37:15 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 17, 2016 12:44:54 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Thursday, March 17, 2016 09:02:29 AM Jo
Rafael,
Something still obscure to me
1)
on commit 303ae7230751
core were using wrmsrl_on_cpu() in core_set_pstate()
atom were using wrmsrl() in byt_set_pstate()
call sequence is
intel_state_init_cpu
-> intel_pstate_get_cpu_pstates()
-> intel_pstate_set_pstate()
-> pstate_funcs.set
On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:13 +0100, Stephane Gasparini wrote:
> Rafael,
>
> Why in step 3) both atom_set_pstate() and atom_set_pstate() were not
> both
> changed to use wrmsrl ?
Initial Atom support was experimental as there were no users, till
Chrome started using. So it was just a miss.
We shoul
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2016 12:44:54 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki
>> wrote:
>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2016 09:02:29 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >> I have an In
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki
> wrote:
>> On Friday, March 18, 2016 08:37:15 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2016 12:44:54 PM Josh Boye
19 matches
Mail list logo
