[PATCH v3 10/15] ACPI: CPPC: Reject reads and RMW of write-only controls
Christian Loehle <[email protected]> Sun, 9 Aug 2026 07:25:44 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.acpi.devel,gmane.linux.power-management.general,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Between _CPC revision 3 and revision 4, Desired Performance changed from
Read/Write to Write. Revision 4 also added the write-only OSPM Nominal
Performance control. ACPI 6.6 section 4.6.3 says reads of write-only bit
positions produce undefined results.
The public Desired Performance helper already rejects revision-4 readback,
but the common register accessor still permits either write-only control to
be read. Reject both centrally so new callers cannot bypass the revision
rule.
A partial SystemMemory field would also make cpc_write() read its complete
access unit to preserve bits outside the field. Reject revision-4
descriptions of either write-only control when their geometry requires RMW.
A full-width description remains supported and is written without a
preceding read.
Mark an inaccessible OSPM Nominal Performance control unsupported because
it is optional. Do the same for inaccessible Desired Performance while
parsing, then let the post-parse control check accept it only for immutable
autonomous selection. This preserves the autonomous-only exception without
accepting an unusable Desired control in non-autonomous mode.
Fixes: 71e1815113f7 ("ACPI: CPPC: Add support for CPPC v4")
Reported-by: Sashiko <[email protected]>
Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260807111303.1062391-1-christian.loehle%40arm.com
Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260808082644.1251332-1-christian.loehle%40arm.com
Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <[email protected]>
---
drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
index 8967ffdac76f..26e4c83dc2df 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
@@ -333,6 +333,21 @@ static bool cpc_reg_is_writable(unsigned int reg_idx)
}
}
+static bool cpc_reg_is_write_only(const struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc,
+ unsigned int reg_idx)
+{
+ return cpc_desc->version >= CPPC_V4_REV &&
+ (reg_idx == DESIRED_PERF || reg_idx == OSPM_NOMINAL_PERF);
+}
+
+static void cpc_disable_reg(struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc, unsigned int reg_idx)
+{
+ struct cpc_register_resource *reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[reg_idx];
+
+ reg->type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
+ reg->cpc_entry.int_value = 0;
+}
+
static bool cpc_sysmem_reg_needs_rmw(const struct cpc_register_resource *reg)
{
const struct cpc_reg *gas = ®->cpc_entry.reg;
@@ -363,6 +378,17 @@ static int cpc_validate_sysmem_reg(const struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc,
if (gas->address & (access_size - 1))
goto invalid;
+ if (cpc_reg_is_write_only(cpc_desc, reg_idx) &&
+ (gas->bit_offset || gas->bit_width != access_width)) {
+ const char *name = reg_idx == DESIRED_PERF ?
+ "Desired Performance" :
+ "OSPM Nominal Performance";
+
+ pr_err("CPU%d: _CPC v%d %s register requires unsupported read-modify-write\n",
+ cpc_desc->cpu_id, cpc_desc->version, name);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
return 0;
invalid:
@@ -1291,6 +1317,17 @@ int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr)
size_t access_width;
err = cpc_validate_sysmem_reg(cpc_ptr, gas_t, i - 2);
+ if (err && (i - 2 == DESIRED_PERF ||
+ i - 2 == OSPM_NOMINAL_PERF)) {
+ const char *name = i - 2 == DESIRED_PERF ?
+ "Desired Performance" :
+ "OSPM Nominal Performance";
+
+ pr_warn("CPU%d: disabling inaccessible %s register\n",
+ pr->id, name);
+ cpc_disable_reg(cpc_ptr, i - 2);
+ continue;
+ }
if (err) {
ret = err;
goto out_free;
@@ -1759,6 +1796,8 @@ static int cppc_get_reg_val(int cpu, enum cppc_regs reg_idx, u64 *val)
pr_debug("No CPC descriptor for CPU:%d\n", cpu);
return -ENODEV;
}
+ if (cpc_reg_is_write_only(cpc_desc, reg_idx))
+ return -EOPNOTSUPP;
reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[reg_idx];
--
2.34.1