Re: [PATCH 2/4] ACPI: PCC: Preserve shared memory signature in OpRegion handler
"Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)" <[email protected]> Tue, 21 Jul 2026 21:20:15 +0200
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.acpica-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAJZ5v0jAOA3iQB6htExJNAtLu5oVJB9nZGzh=0+uaerVwgHMxQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 2:27=E2=80=AFPM Sudeep Holla <[email protected]= rg> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 07:43:53PM +0800, lihuisong (C) wrote: > > > > On 7/17/2026 4:10 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > ACPI 6.3 introduced PCC OperationRegions. Section 5.5.2.4.7.3, > > > "Declaring message fields within a PCC OperationRegion", states that, > > > for all PCC subspace types, the PCC Operation Region pertains to the > > > region of PCC subspace that succeeds the PCC signature. > > > > > > The PCC address space handler currently copies the OperationRegion > > > buffer to and from the start of the PCC shared memory region. That ca= n > > > overwrite or expose the signature at byte offset 0, and it also misse= s > > > the last 4 bytes of the actual PCC OperationRegion data. > > > > > > Offset OperationRegion copies by the size of the signature and reject > > > regions that do not fit in the shared memory after that signature. AM= L > > > that sizes the PCC OperationRegion to include the signature is not > > > conforming to the PCC OperationRegion definition. > > > > > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]> > > > Fixes: 77e2a04745ff ("ACPI: PCC: Implement OperationRegion handler fo= r the PCC Type 3 subtype") > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> > > > --- > > The below commit description said the PCC operationRegion contains the > > signature field. > > "77e2a04745ff ("ACPI: PCC: Implement OperationRegion handler for the PC= C > > Type 3 subtype")" > > And I find that the definition of this OperationRegion in ACPI spec 6.3= is > > the same with spec 6.5 and 6.6. > > That is, the original implementation already didn't comply with ACPI sp= ec. > > > > Patch 1/4 also requires the change of platform AML about PCC > > OperationRegion. > > These modification may lead to the existed PCC OperationRegion method i= n > > some drivers doesn't work. > > Because the platform AML still contains signature field in PCC > > OperationRegion method. > > I don't know how many drivers in linux have used this method. > > IMO, we at least need to reclarify this usage change and provide a new = usage > > example in the commit log like the original commit did. > > > > Good point, I didn't realise I had wrong example in the original commit. > I will add the example of correct usage in this change. Thanks for pointi= ng > it out. > > > Anyway, this patch also makes the driver more compliant with the > > specifications. > > So I agree. > > Reviewed-by: Huisong Li <[email protected]> > > > > Thanks again for all the review. I gather that there will be a v2 then.