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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8326DC433E1 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 16:53:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EDBE2067D for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 16:53:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="CaXNnHr+" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2EDBE2067D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B58qM59P3zDqM7 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 02:53:35 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::444; helo=mail-pf1-x444.google.com; envelope-from=npiggin@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=CaXNnHr+; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pf1-x444.google.com (mail-pf1-x444.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::444]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B58lP32N1zDqVF for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 02:50:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pf1-x444.google.com with SMTP id u5so6262291pfn.7 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 09:50:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:subject:to:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:message-id :content-transfer-encoding; bh=nVkt+Xm/RkQTKeA2jb/S9J8CgntFMc1lva1n2yBK5Ug=; b=CaXNnHr+IzMUDxpQDvFSv/E5P7KIiogfIyf5xsA3V0eQmBRaj/nQqUHwox4eg1pHgw 7uIsGBjNVBJuN3LBDH0YCBLucPbVxinNIdOSXnl5/Mas7DUjsbz38jriPYj2f0AtJX6Y tngEXIFoBSx8o/IVVWDmoLKnXmYVsjf7ixWY/w4wQS05xSFy5AxAzX4t+v+tNTOhW1Q0 ewX9cIPKqNTXQiXUUPWp9/PoGvsr4GX2HgjxIKUafu19cJuJn9rgs2bskytV/ludgQbF 62vpj90Hzj+W+zXOEGicCFsvnZqsbBathrmOP1TOslsn4Ll4fYw59XBPeDy8AA3dbQMt DR+g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nVkt+Xm/RkQTKeA2jb/S9J8CgntFMc1lva1n2yBK5Ug=; b=DlAQ7KmprQfujG5mlp9yb9Jx4QyVEC87fSkXEa58JLEHmt0rLLk+a0suADdW+8o5c5 IcfIj4cwqyA8lHRSpevzGu5ErAzP/5etmiBoTsfrK50XRt1v/cwRWRTqpJG2NuUTBczd +1sWXYKtIOJE7pDKUuDZh/7guHUFjyAQubKPQkrYNMmDUW4G6UlOE0e626WDmuhLut/m GPlFJNDZRtZzfqcm0aGXk05u+AZNf5j+JnFspUixpFGqeYS4UfoRF6KUo0GDXtafesJm ABbTyydptOANr++udyde/IcgvC21Bb/rNirU9qSbOsU+oUul6E4OQP1yglze4InCv+gK OldA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532aB80i8C4Fcmm6bgmfSzahmTj9phrMUn/ZqDwhqiEHWSmcsKu4 i1swOwJF9ULW6t0BMDqvVDM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzOeudM5I8zL6WtkRfH73ta8+P2xSi1dulw3OXiBONHI3w8F2bCLGrZSAYaLXNb023RPhGS+g== X-Received: by 2002:a63:1007:: with SMTP id f7mr78840pgl.147.1594659006024; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 09:50:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (110-174-173-27.tpgi.com.au. [110.174.173.27]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x8sm14640967pfn.61.2020.07.13.09.50.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 13 Jul 2020 09:50:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 02:50:00 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Power10 basic energy management To: benh@kernel.crashing.org, ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mikey@neuling.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, paulus@samba.org, pratik.r.sampat@gmail.com, Pratik Sampat , ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com, svaidy@linux.ibm.com References: <20200710052207.12003-1-psampat@linux.ibm.com> <1594617564.57k8bsyfd0.astroid@bobo.none> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1594658947.97ndhsx6xh.astroid@bobo.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Excerpts from Pratik Sampat's message of July 13, 2020 8:02 pm: > Thank you for your comments, >=20 > On 13/07/20 10:53 am, Nicholas Piggin wrote: >> Excerpts from Pratik Rajesh Sampat's message of July 10, 2020 3:22 pm: >>> Changelog v1 --> v2: >>> 1. Save-restore DAWR and DAWRX unconditionally as they are lost in >>> shallow idle states too >>> 2. Rename pnv_first_spr_loss_level to pnv_first_fullstate_loss_level to >>> correct naming terminology >>> >>> Pratik Rajesh Sampat (3): >>> powerpc/powernv/idle: Exclude mfspr on HID1,4,5 on P9 and above >>> powerpc/powernv/idle: save-restore DAWR0,DAWRX0 for P10 >>> powerpc/powernv/idle: Rename pnv_first_spr_loss_level variable >>> >>> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/idle.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++---------= - >>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >> These look okay to me, but the CPU_FTR_ARCH_300 test for >> pnv_power9_idle_init() is actually wrong, it should be a PVR test >> because idle is not completely architected (not even shallow stop >> states, unfortunately). >> >> It doesn't look like we support POWER10 idle correctly yet, and on older >> kernels it wouldn't work even if we fixed newer, so ideally the PVR >> check would be backported as a fix in the front of the series. >> >> Sadly, we have no OPAL idle driver yet. Hopefully we will before the >> next processor shows up :P >> >> Thanks, >> Nick >=20 > So if I understand this correctly, in powernv/idle.c where we check for > CPU_FTR_ARCH_300, we should rather be making a pvr_version_is(PVR_POWER9) > check instead? >=20 > Of course, the P10 PVR and its relevant checks will have to be added then= too. Yes I think so, unfortunately. Thanks, Nick