Re: [PATCH 0/2] amd-pstate: Make amd-pstate the default driver on server platforms

[Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>]

On 10/22/2024 00:11, Gautham R. Shenoy wrote:
> Hello Mario,
> 
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 08:05:17AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>> On 10/21/2024 05:18, Gautham R. Shenoy wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This patchset contains two patches to
>>>
>>> * Prevent frequency throttling on power-limited systems with
>>>     amd-pstate active mode with performance governor.
>>>
>>> * Make amd_pstate default on EPYC Family 1A+. Based on tests, the
>>>     amd-pstate driver performs well enough on EPYC.
>>>
>>> These patches are based on the "linux-next" branch of
>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/superm1/linux.git
>>>
>>> Gautham R. Shenoy (1):
>>>     amd-pstate: Set min_perf to nominal_perf for active mode performance
>>>       gov
>>>
>>> Swapnil Sapkal (1):
>>>     amd-pstate: Switch to amd-pstate by default on some Server platforms
>>>
>>>    drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c | 6 +++---
>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
>>
> 
> Thank you!
> 
>> I'll queue this up for 6.13.
>>
>> There were previously two differences for server and non-server:
>>   * amd-pstate not enabled by default
>>   * amd-pstate cpufreq policy starting in performance mode vs power-save?
>>
>> This series adjusts the first for at least the newer parts, but I would like
>> to ask does it make sense to also evaluating changing the default policy to
>> powersave as a follow up, or should this policy delta remain?
> 
> We would like to retain the policy delta for now and retain
> CPUFREQ_POLICY_PERFORMANCE as the default on servers.
> 

Ack, thanks.