On 7/15/2022 10:25 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: > Today PAT can't be used without MTRR being available, unless MTRR is at > least configured via CONFIG_MTRR and the system is running as Xen PV > guest. In this case PAT is automatically available via the hypervisor, > but the PAT MSR can't be modified by the kernel and MTRR is disabled. > > As an additional complexity the availability of PAT can't be queried > via pat_enabled() in the Xen PV case, as the lack of MTRR will set PAT > to be disabled. This leads to some drivers believing that not all cache > modes are available, resulting in failures or degraded functionality. > > The same applies to a kernel built with no MTRR support: it won't > allow to use the PAT MSR, even if there is no technical reason for > that, other than setting up PAT on all cpus the same way (which is a > requirement of the processor's cache management) is relying on some > MTRR specific code. > > Fix all of that by: > > - moving the function needed by PAT from MTRR specific code one level > up > - adding a PAT indirection layer supporting the 3 cases "no or disabled > PAT", "PAT under kernel control", and "PAT under Xen control" > - removing the dependency of PAT on MTRR > > Juergen Gross (3): > x86: move some code out of arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr > x86: add wrapper functions for mtrr functions handling also pat > x86: decouple pat and mtrr handling > > arch/x86/include/asm/memtype.h | 13 ++- > arch/x86/include/asm/mtrr.h | 27 ++++-- > arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 10 +++ > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 123 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/generic.c | 90 ++------------------ > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/mtrr.c | 58 ++++--------- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/mtrr.h | 1 - > arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 12 +-- > arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 8 +- > arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c | 127 +++++++++++++++++++++-------- > arch/x86/power/cpu.c | 2 +- > arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c | 4 + > 12 files changed, 289 insertions(+), 186 deletions(-) >
This patch series seems related to the regression reported here on May 5, 2022: https://lore.kernel.org/regressions/YnHK1Z3o99eMXsVK@mail-itl/ I am experiencing that regression and could test this patch on my system. Can you confirm that with this patch series you are trying to fix that regression? Chuck
