ACPI / CPPC: do not require the _PSD method
[ Upstream commit 4c4cdc4c ] According to the ACPI 6.3 specification, the _PSD method is optional when using CPPC. The underlying assumption is that each CPU can change frequency independently from all other CPUs; _PSD is provided to tell the OS that some processors can NOT do that. However, the acpi_get_psd() function returns ENODEV if there is no _PSD method present, or an ACPI error status if an error occurs when evaluating _PSD, if present. This makes _PSD mandatory when using CPPC, in violation of the specification, and only on Linux. This has forced some firmware writers to provide a dummy _PSD, even though it is irrelevant, but only because Linux requires it; other OSPMs follow the spec. We really do not want to have OS specific ACPI tables, though. So, correct acpi_get_psd() so that it does not return an error if there is no _PSD method present, but does return a failure when the method can not be executed properly. This allows _PSD to be optional as it should be. Signed-off-by: Al Stone <ahs3@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment