Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: errata: Handle Apple WFI State Loss
Will Deacon <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.asahi,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <ajUK5gIX_ZttSsx6@willie-the-truck> |
On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 09:23:03PM +0200, Yureka Lilian wrote: > On 6/15/26 17:02, Will Deacon wrote: > > In fact, would wfe be a better choice than nop for you? > > Regarding wfe: Simply replacing the wfi with wfe on these particular > machines leads to them getting stuck in the boot process (entering wfe on > the boot core and never waking up again), maybe because some kinds of > interrupts do not count as as events for the wfe wake-up? argh, I had forgotten that a pending masked interrupt doesn't wake up a WFE (it does wake up a WFI). So we probably shouldn't have wfe in the list of idle instruction choices (unless we want to rely on the eventstream). Will