Re: 答复: [外部邮件] Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpufreq: acpi-cpufreq: fix P-state index mismatch in extract_io()
From: Zhongqiu Han
Date: Tue Aug 18 2026 - 04:39:15 EST
On 8/18/2026 2:46 PM, Li,Rongqing wrote:
When policy->freq_table is built in acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init(), entries
with duplicate frequencies are skipped. The original P-state index for
each remaining entry is stored in freq_table[].driver_data, so the
index space of freq_table no longer matches perf->states[].
extract_io() walks perf->states[] with index i and uses the same i to
index policy->freq_table[i]. This causes two problems when duplicate
frequencies exist:
- Returning the frequency of the wrong P-state
- Returning 0 from a zeroed tail entry, or even CPUFREQ_TABLE_END
(~1u) reported as 0xfffffffe kHz
AFAICT, It may be worth expanding the changelog to cover the consequences
described below , particularly the resulting divergence between the hardware
state and the cpufreq core's view of the current
frequency:
Furthermore, extract_io() is only reachable on ACPI_ADR_SPACE_SYSTEM_IO
platforms, where cpufreq_driver->get is not installed, so its only caller in
practice is check_freqs(), i.e. only when the acpi_pstate_strict module
parameter is set.
There, the mismatched lookup makes the frequency comparison fail even
though drv_write() has already switched the hardware to the requested P-state.
So check_freqs() sleeps through all 100 iterations - at least
~1 ms of usleep_range() plus 100 cross-CPU calls and I/O port reads, all with
policy->rwsem held - and ->target_index() returns -EAGAIN. perf
->state is therefore left at its previous value while the hardware sits
at the new one.
The core then restores policy->cur to the old frequency, and because
__cpufreq_driver_target() returns early when the requested frequency equals
policy->cur, the driver is not called again for it - so the control register is not
rewritten and the CPU is left running at a frequency the core does not know
about.
Fix it by walking policy->freq_table with cpufreq_for_each_entry() and
using perf->states[pos->driver_data].status, aligning with extract_msr().
Fixes: 8cee1eed8e78 ("cpufreq: ACPI: Remove freq_table from
acpi_cpufreq_data")
The real tag should be fe27cb358835 ("[CPUFREQ][2/8] acpi:
reorganize code to make MSR support addition easier")
That commit added both the entry-skipping loop with the freq_table[].index
(now .driver_data) back-pointer, which is what makes the two indices diverge,
and the faulty lookup itself -- back then in a function called extract_freq().
dde9f7ba60ad ("[CPUFREQ][3/8] acpi
cpufreq: Pull in MSR based transition support") merely renamed it to
extract_io().
Thanks, I will send v3
Thanks, I will review the patch v2 2/2
[Li,Rongqing]
Signed-off-by: Li RongQing <lirongqing@xxxxxxxxx>*policy, u32 value)
---
drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c index 21639d9..1abe9ab 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
@@ -197,14 +197,13 @@ static unsigned extract_io(struct cpufreq_policy
{
struct acpi_cpufreq_data *data = policy->driver_data;
struct acpi_processor_performance *perf;
- int i;
+ struct cpufreq_frequency_table *pos;
perf = to_perf_data(data);
- for (i = 0; i < perf->state_count; i++) {
- if (value == perf->states[i].status)
- return policy->freq_table[i].frequency;
- }
+ cpufreq_for_each_entry(pos, policy->freq_table)
+ if (value == perf->states[pos->driver_data].status)
+ return pos->frequency;
return 0;
}
--
Thx and BRs,
Zhongqiu Han
--
Thx and BRs,
Zhongqiu Han