From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74B8DFF8855 for ; Tue, 5 May 2026 20:36:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=kj5EcbKmAvaPgDhM2/I2YyyTWJYcSgjtJQGNAhwJC4E=; b=MbEEfGNnC/dVmvwWFPdzgFCtMl XtzGwBpUFwOUH5bsZj7fwzi/Ohv0k+IrLoSsdITpk+/mpS7nxRhiqxgj3wSBusyB5RRH6TjMTwP9d SNZx66//eTjAtzl9SUttqOjzJfnklD2cMQ8VGI4834wI/GjnM1TF+f2pT+cW+liH1kSH4N2Ze6SXW nX1tsovszj7UUidqbGB89Zj1fUSYhNKkqe+wEs0GKzUmTKlJ4Iu1MZcVS5njZNGV0zGuQleI2f4yJ s8BrfrBJBrfuBHW9EBpPE288E1t9zDrzVN3efVodndrUdUNdTbOdW3yD1jALoYXVBldbZ9+Iy3u7/ OIyuoq5Q==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wKMVR-0000000HRoK-2P8n; Tue, 05 May 2026 20:36:37 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wKMVO-0000000HRnX-2YJO for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 05 May 2026 20:36:35 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6AAC1BB0; Tue, 5 May 2026 13:36:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9D5C3F763; Tue, 5 May 2026 13:36:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1778013392; bh=XoDo/BJrZK4cQyuJeIpDlXSHvN6Qo6ESDgeLnoaopG4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=MqTaghAZAr2+Ff4nnCPEGc5h4c7scu3KsGj0tEPSH3qRIvIkPkvg34LJNIcrABugc PrnyVYk9F+O3TYZNIuiua/Qbdg8CX8XyVTBHQXKtjoSUfAxF91Y6pmkESltkSeqyJa QHjVX33PKKRJLZ8Yp2W5yG9wHV3WPA6mmUdPhpI0= Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 21:36:26 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: Philip Radford Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, etienne.carriere@st.com, peng.fan@oss.nxp.com, michal.simek@amd.com, quic_sibis@quicinc.com, dan.carpenter@linaro.org, d-gole@ti.com, souvik.chakravarty@arm.com, cristian.marussi@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/12] firmware: arm_scmi: add Powercap MAI get/set support Message-ID: References: <20260428090922.346069-1-philip.radford@arm.com> <20260428090922.346069-10-philip.radford@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260428090922.346069-10-philip.radford@arm.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260505_133634_759338_7E628CAF X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 23.61 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 10:09:18AM +0100, Philip Radford wrote: > Add support for Power Measurement Averaging Interval (MAI) Hi, > get and set operations to the SCMI powercap protocol driver. > Extends scmi_powercap_info to store MAI configuration and > implement MAI get/set via xfer and optional fast-channel > support. You have to stay under 75 chars...ok...but I'd say this commit message lines are way to short...you can stretch a bit more towards 75chars without having to split words I think....because t o o s h o r t l i n e s are not so good anyway :P > > Signed-off-by: Philip Radford > --- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/powercap.c | 120 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/scmi_protocol.h | 8 ++ > 2 files changed, 128 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/powercap.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/powercap.c > index 86262eb0f34a..b5879f204b5e 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/powercap.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/powercap.c > @@ -401,6 +401,34 @@ scmi_powercap_domain_attrs_process(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, > dom_info->notify_powercap_measurement_change = > SUPPORTS_POWERCAP_MEASUREMENTS_CHANGE_NOTIFY(flags); > > + if (PROTOCOL_REV_MAJOR(ph->version) >= 0x3) { > + struct scmi_msg_resp_powercap_domain_attributes_v3 *resp_v3 = r; > + > + flags = le32_to_cpu(resp_v3->attributes); > + if (pinfo->notify_measurements_cmd) > + dom_info->notify_powercap_measurement_change = > + SUPPORTS_POWERCAP_MEASUREMENTS_CHANGE_NOTIFY(flags); > + > + dom_info->mai_config = SUPPORTS_POWERCAP_MAI_CONFIGURATION(flags); > + dom_info->min_mai = le32_to_cpu(resp_v3->min_mai); > + dom_info->max_mai = le32_to_cpu(resp_v3->max_mai); > + dom_info->mai_step = le32_to_cpu(resp_v3->mai_step); > + > + if (dom_info->mai_config) { > + ret = scmi_powercap_validate(dom_info->min_mai, > + dom_info->max_mai, > + dom_info->mai_step, > + dom_info->mai_config); > + > + if (ret) { > + dev_warn(ph->dev, "Platform reported problem MAI config for domain %d - %s\n", "....reported invalid MAI config for domain..." > + dom_info->id, dom_info->name); > + > + return ret; > + } > + } > + } > + > dom_info->extended_names = SUPPORTS_EXTENDED_NAMES(flags); > > dom_info->async_powercap_cap_set = > @@ -1082,6 +1110,96 @@ static int scmi_powercap_cap_enable_get(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, > return 0; > } > > +static int scmi_powercap_xfer_mai_get(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, u32 domain_id, > + u32 *mai) ..bad alignment and till now we try still to stick tpo 80cols in the SCMI stack if it does NOT really hamper readability... > +{ > + int ret; > + struct scmi_xfer *t; > + > + ret = ph->xops->xfer_get_init(ph, POWERCAP_MAI_GET, sizeof(u32), > + sizeof(u32), &t); ...terrible alignment...and you know why :D > + > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + put_unaligned_le32(domain_id, t->tx.buf); > + > + ret = ph->xops->do_xfer(ph, t); > + if (!ret) > + *mai = get_unaligned_le32(t->rx.buf); > + > + ph->xops->xfer_put(ph, t); > + return ret; > +} > + > +static int scmi_powercap_xfer_mai_set(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, u32 domain_id, u32 mai) ..same...try to stick to 80 cols when not impossibly ugly.. > +{ > + int ret; > + struct scmi_xfer *t; > + struct scmi_msg_powercap_cap_or_pai_set *msg; > + > + ret = ph->xops->xfer_get_init(ph, POWERCAP_MAI_SET, sizeof(*msg), 0, &t); same > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + msg = t->tx.buf; > + msg->domain_id = cpu_to_le32(domain_id); > + msg->flags = cpu_to_le32(0); > + msg->value = cpu_to_le32(mai); > + > + ret = ph->xops->do_xfer(ph, t); > + > + ph->xops->xfer_put(ph, t); > + return ret; > +} > + > +static int scmi_powercap_measurements_interval_get(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, > + u32 domain_id, u32 *val) > +{ ditto > + const struct scmi_powercap_info *pc; > + struct scmi_fc_info *fci; > + > + if (!val) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + pc = scmi_powercap_dom_info_get(ph, domain_id); > + if (!pc) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + fci = pc->cpli[CPL0].fc_info; > + if (fci && fci[POWERCAP_FC_MAI].get_addr) { > + *val = ioread32(fci[POWERCAP_FC_MAI].get_addr); > + trace_scmi_fc_call(SCMI_PROTOCOL_POWERCAP, POWERCAP_MAI_GET, domain_id, 0, *val, 0); ditto > + return 0; > + } > + > + return scmi_powercap_xfer_mai_get(ph, domain_id, val); > +} > + > +static int scmi_powercap_measurements_interval_set(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, > + u32 domain_id, u32 val) > +{ ditto > + const struct scmi_powercap_info *pc; > + struct scmi_fc_info *fci; > + > + pc = scmi_powercap_dom_info_get(ph, domain_id); > + if (!pc) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + if (!pc->mai_config || !val || val < pc->min_mai || val > pc->max_mai) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + fci = pc->cpli[CPL0].fc_info; > + if (fci && fci[POWERCAP_FC_MAI].set_addr) { > + iowrite32(val, fci[POWERCAP_FC_MAI].set_addr); > + ph->hops->fastchannel_db_ring(fci[POWERCAP_FC_MAI].set_db); > + trace_scmi_fc_call(SCMI_PROTOCOL_POWERCAP, POWERCAP_MAI_SET, domain_id, 0, val, 0); > + return 0; > + } > + > + return scmi_powercap_xfer_mai_set(ph, domain_id, val); > +} > + > static const struct scmi_powercap_proto_ops powercap_proto_ops = { > .num_domains_get = scmi_powercap_num_domains_get, > .info_get = scmi_powercap_dom_info_get, > @@ -1094,6 +1212,8 @@ static const struct scmi_powercap_proto_ops powercap_proto_ops = { > .measurements_get = scmi_powercap_measurements_get, > .measurements_threshold_set = scmi_powercap_measurements_threshold_set, > .measurements_threshold_get = scmi_powercap_measurements_threshold_get, > + .measurements_interval_get = scmi_powercap_measurements_interval_get, > + .measurements_interval_set = scmi_powercap_measurements_interval_set, > }; > > static void scmi_powercap_domain_init_fc(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, > diff --git a/include/linux/scmi_protocol.h b/include/linux/scmi_protocol.h > index d0f6c0102559..73d66281dcc3 100644 > --- a/include/linux/scmi_protocol.h > +++ b/include/linux/scmi_protocol.h > @@ -675,6 +675,10 @@ struct scmi_powercap_info { > bool powercap_scale_uw; > bool extended_names; > bool fastchannels; > + bool mai_config; > + u32 min_mai; > + u32 max_mai; > + u32 mai_step; No docs for new fields ? > char name[SCMI_MAX_STR_SIZE]; > unsigned int sustainable_power; > unsigned int accuracy; > @@ -758,6 +762,10 @@ struct scmi_powercap_proto_ops { > int (*measurements_threshold_get)(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, > u32 domain_id, u32 *power_thresh_low, > u32 *power_thresh_high); > + int (*measurements_interval_get)(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, > + u32 domain_id, u32 *val); > + int (*measurements_interval_set)(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, > + u32 domain_id, u32 val); No docs for new fields ? Thanks, Cristian