[PATCH 1/1] acpi-cpufreq: Honor _PSD table setting in CPU frequency control

[PATCH 1/1] acpi-cpufreq: Honor _PSD table setting in CPU frequency control

[Wei Huang]

acpi-cpufreq has a old quirk that overrides the _PSD table supplied by
BIOS on AMD CPUs. However the _PSD table of new AMD CPUs (Family 19h+)
now accurately reports the P-state dependency of CPU cores. Hence this
quirk needs to be fixed in order to support new CPUs' frequency control.

Fixes: acd316248205 ("acpi-cpufreq: Add quirk to disable _PSD usage on all AMD CPUs")
Signed-off-by: Wei Huang <wei.huang2@amd.com>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
index e4ff681faaaa..1e6e2abde428 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
@@ -691,7 +691,8 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
 		cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, topology_core_cpumask(cpu));
 	}
 
-	if (check_amd_hwpstate_cpu(cpu) && !acpi_pstate_strict) {
+	if (check_amd_hwpstate_cpu(cpu) && (c->x86 < 0x19) &&
+	    !acpi_pstate_strict) {
 		cpumask_clear(policy->cpus);
 		cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus);
 		cpumask_copy(data->freqdomain_cpus,
-- 
2.26.2

Re: [PATCH 1/1] acpi-cpufreq: Honor _PSD table setting in CPU frequency control

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 10:44 PM Wei Huang <wei.huang2@amd.com> wrote:
>
> acpi-cpufreq has a old quirk that overrides the _PSD table supplied by
> BIOS on AMD CPUs. However the _PSD table of new AMD CPUs (Family 19h+)
> now accurately reports the P-state dependency of CPU cores. Hence this
> quirk needs to be fixed in order to support new CPUs' frequency control.
>
> Fixes: acd316248205 ("acpi-cpufreq: Add quirk to disable _PSD usage on all AMD CPUs")
> Signed-off-by: Wei Huang <wei.huang2@amd.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> index e4ff681faaaa..1e6e2abde428 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> @@ -691,7 +691,8 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>                 cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, topology_core_cpumask(cpu));
>         }
>
> -       if (check_amd_hwpstate_cpu(cpu) && !acpi_pstate_strict) {
> +       if (check_amd_hwpstate_cpu(cpu) && (c->x86 < 0x19) &&

Why don't you use boot_cpu_data instead of *c?

And why don't you do the extra check in check_amd_hwpstate_cpu()?

Also the parens around it are not necessary here and is there any
chance for having a proper symbol instead of the raw 0x19 in that
check?

> +           !acpi_pstate_strict) {
>                 cpumask_clear(policy->cpus);
>                 cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus);
>                 cpumask_copy(data->freqdomain_cpus,
> --
> 2.26.2
>

Re: [PATCH 1/1] acpi-cpufreq: Honor _PSD table setting in CPU frequency control

[Wei Huang]

On 10/16 04:58, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 10:44 PM Wei Huang <wei.huang2@amd.com> wrote:
> >
> > acpi-cpufreq has a old quirk that overrides the _PSD table supplied by
> > BIOS on AMD CPUs. However the _PSD table of new AMD CPUs (Family 19h+)
> > now accurately reports the P-state dependency of CPU cores. Hence this
> > quirk needs to be fixed in order to support new CPUs' frequency control.
> >
> > Fixes: acd316248205 ("acpi-cpufreq: Add quirk to disable _PSD usage on all AMD CPUs")
> > Signed-off-by: Wei Huang <wei.huang2@amd.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 3 ++-
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> > index e4ff681faaaa..1e6e2abde428 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> > @@ -691,7 +691,8 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> >                 cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, topology_core_cpumask(cpu));
> >         }
> >
> > -       if (check_amd_hwpstate_cpu(cpu) && !acpi_pstate_strict) {
> > +       if (check_amd_hwpstate_cpu(cpu) && (c->x86 < 0x19) &&
> 
> Why don't you use boot_cpu_data instead of *c?

Thanks for your review. c->x86 contains the same level of information as boot_cpu_data when
acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init() starts to execute. But you are right, it is better to use boot_cpu_data,
consistent with the rest code in the same function.

> 
> And why don't you do the extra check in check_amd_hwpstate_cpu()?

check_amd_hwpstate_cpu() is called at various locations. This _PSD fix doesn't apply at
other callers.

> 
> Also the parens around it are not necessary here and is there any

I will remove it in the next rev.

> chance for having a proper symbol instead of the raw 0x19 in that
> check?

Unfortunately I didn't find a replacement. Only x86_vendor has an acronym. The rest
(fam/model/stepping) use numerical values, including in arch/x86 boot code.

> 
> > +           !acpi_pstate_strict) {
> >                 cpumask_clear(policy->cpus);
> >                 cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus);
> >                 cpumask_copy(data->freqdomain_cpus,
> > --
> > 2.26.2
> >