Re: [PATCH v1] x86/amd_nb: Add new PCI IDs for AMD family 0x1a model 60h

[Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com>]

On 7/18/2024 22:43, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 07:32:58PM +0530, Shyam Sundar S K wrote:
>> Add the new PCI Device IDs to the root IDs and misc ids list to support
>> new generation of AMD 1Ah family 60h Models of processors.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com>
>> ---
>> (As the amd_nb functions are used by PMC and PMF drivers, without these IDs
>> being present AMD PMF/PMC probe shall fail.)
> 
> Is there any plan for making this generic so a kernel update is not
> needed?  Obviously the *functionality* is not changed by this patch,
> so having to add a device ID for every new processor just makes work
> for distros and users.

Regarding AMD processors, there are numerous PCI IDs defined in the
PPRs/BKDG. I'm not sure if there's a generic way to address this
without a kernel update.

> 
>>  arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c | 3 +++
>>  include/linux/pci_ids.h  | 1 +
>>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c
>> index 059e5c16af05..61eadde08511 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c
>> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_19H_M70H_ROOT		0x14e8
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M00H_ROOT		0x153a
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M20H_ROOT		0x1507
>> +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M60H_ROOT		0x1122
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI200_ROOT		0x14bb
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI300_ROOT		0x14f8
>>  
>> @@ -63,6 +64,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id amd_root_ids[] = {
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_19H_M70H_ROOT) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M00H_ROOT) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M20H_ROOT) },
>> +	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M60H_ROOT) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI200_ROOT) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI300_ROOT) },
>>  	{}
>> @@ -95,6 +97,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id amd_nb_misc_ids[] = {
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_19H_M78H_DF_F3) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M00H_DF_F3) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M20H_DF_F3) },
>> +	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M60H_DF_F3) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M70H_DF_F3) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI200_DF_F3) },
>>  	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI300_DF_F3) },
>> diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h
>> index 76a8f2d6bd64..bbe8f3dfa813 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h
>> @@ -580,6 +580,7 @@
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_19H_M78H_DF_F3 0x12fb
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M00H_DF_F3 0x12c3
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M20H_DF_F3 0x16fb
>> +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M60H_DF_F3 0x124b
> 
> Why not add this in amd_nb.c, as you did for
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M60H_ROOT?  There's already a
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_CNB17H_F4 definition there.  No need to update
> pci_ids.h unless PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M60H_DF_F3 is used in more than
> one place.
> 
> Based on previous history, I suppose PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M60H_DF_F3
> will someday be used by k10temp.c?  Ideally a pci_ids.h addition would
> be in the same patch that adds uses in both amd_nb.c and k10temp.c so
> it's clear that the new definition is used in two places.
> 

Okay, I understand your point. I will add
PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M60H_DF_F3 to k10temp.c in v2.

Thanks,
Shyam

>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_1AH_M70H_DF_F3 0x12bb
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI200_DF_F3	0x14d3
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI300_DF_F3	0x152b
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>>