public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
Cc: Perry Yuan <perry.yuan@amd.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Always write EPP value when updating perf
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 14:12:13 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z1atZRyH3dbWQYjv@BLRRASHENOY1.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241208063031.3113-13-mario.limonciello@amd.com>

Hello Mario,

On Sun, Dec 08, 2024 at 12:30:27AM -0600, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> For MSR systems the EPP value is in the same register as perf targets
> and so divding them into two separate MSR writes is wasteful.
> 
> In msr_update_perf(), update both EPP and perf values in one write to
> MSR_AMD_CPPC_REQ, and cache them if successful.
> 
> To accomplish this plumb the EPP value into the update_perf call and modify
> all its callers to check the return value.
> 
> Reviewed-and-tested-by: Dhananjay Ugwekar <dhananjay.ugwekar@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>  1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> index d21acd961edcd..dd11ba6c00cc3 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> @@ -222,25 +222,36 @@ static s16 shmem_get_epp(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
>  }
>  
>  static int msr_update_perf(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata, u32 min_perf,
> -			       u32 des_perf, u32 max_perf, bool fast_switch)
> +			   u32 des_perf, u32 max_perf, u32 epp, bool fast_switch)
>  {
> +	u64 value;
> +
> +	value = READ_ONCE(cpudata->cppc_req_cached);


There seems to be a mismatch here between what the API is passing and
parameters and how this function is *not* using them, and instead
using cpudata->cppc_req_cached.

The expectation seems to be that the max_perf, min_perf, des_perf and
epp fields in cpudata->cppc_req_cached would be the same as @des_perf,
@max_perf, @min_perf and @ep, no ?

Or is it that for the MSR update, the value in
cpudata->cppc_req_cached take precedence over the arguments passed ?

Ideally, the "value" should be recomputed here using (@min_perf |
@max_perf | @des_perf | @epp) and that value should be cached as you
are doing below.


>  	if (fast_switch) {
>  		wrmsrl(MSR_AMD_CPPC_REQ, READ_ONCE(cpudata->cppc_req_cached));
>  		return 0;
> +	} else {
> +		int ret = wrmsrl_on_cpu(cpudata->cpu, MSR_AMD_CPPC_REQ,
> +					READ_ONCE(cpudata->cppc_req_cached));
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
>  	}
>  
> -	return wrmsrl_on_cpu(cpudata->cpu, MSR_AMD_CPPC_REQ,
> -			     READ_ONCE(cpudata->cppc_req_cached));
> +	WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->cppc_req_cached, value);

Since cppc_req_cached is not changed, why write it again ?

> +	WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->epp_cached, epp);
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(amd_pstate_update_perf, msr_update_perf);
>  
>  static inline int amd_pstate_update_perf(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata,
>  					  u32 min_perf, u32 des_perf,
> -					  u32 max_perf, bool fast_switch)
> +					  u32 max_perf, u32 epp,
> +					  bool fast_switch)
>  {
>  	return static_call(amd_pstate_update_perf)(cpudata, min_perf, des_perf,
> -						   max_perf, fast_switch);
> +						   max_perf, epp, fast_switch);
>  }
>  
>  static int msr_set_epp(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata, u32 epp)
> @@ -459,12 +470,19 @@ static inline int amd_pstate_init_perf(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
>  	return static_call(amd_pstate_init_perf)(cpudata);
>  }
>  
> -static int shmem_update_perf(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata,
> -			     u32 min_perf, u32 des_perf,
> -			     u32 max_perf, bool fast_switch)
> +static int shmem_update_perf(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata, u32 min_perf,
> +			     u32 des_perf, u32 max_perf, u32 epp, bool fast_switch)
>  {
>  	struct cppc_perf_ctrls perf_ctrls;
>  
> +	if (cppc_state == AMD_PSTATE_ACTIVE) {
> +		int ret = shmem_set_epp(cpudata, epp);
> +
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
> +		WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->epp_cached, epp);
> +	}
> +
>  	perf_ctrls.max_perf = max_perf;
>  	perf_ctrls.min_perf = min_perf;
>  	perf_ctrls.desired_perf = des_perf;
> @@ -545,10 +563,10 @@ static void amd_pstate_update(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata, u32 min_perf,
>  
>  	WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->cppc_req_cached, value);
>  
> -	amd_pstate_update_perf(cpudata, min_perf, des_perf,
> -			       max_perf, fast_switch);
> +	amd_pstate_update_perf(cpudata, min_perf, des_perf, max_perf, 0, fast_switch);
>  
>  cpufreq_policy_put:
> +
>  	cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>  }
>  
> @@ -1545,6 +1563,7 @@ static int amd_pstate_epp_update_limit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  {
>  	struct amd_cpudata *cpudata = policy->driver_data;
>  	u64 value;
> +	u32 epp;
>  
>  	amd_pstate_update_min_max_limit(policy);
>  
> @@ -1557,23 +1576,19 @@ static int amd_pstate_epp_update_limit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  	value |= FIELD_PREP(AMD_CPPC_MIN_PERF_MASK, cpudata->min_limit_perf);
>  
>  	if (cpudata->policy == CPUFREQ_POLICY_PERFORMANCE)
> -		WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->epp_cached, 0);
> -	value |= FIELD_PREP(AMD_CPPC_EPP_PERF_MASK, cpudata->epp_cached);
> -
> -	WRITE_ONCE(cpudata->cppc_req_cached, value);
> +		epp = 0;
> +	else
> +		epp = READ_ONCE(cpudata->epp_cached);
>  
>  	if (trace_amd_pstate_epp_perf_enabled()) {
> -		trace_amd_pstate_epp_perf(cpudata->cpu, cpudata->highest_perf,
> -					  cpudata->epp_cached,
> +		trace_amd_pstate_epp_perf(cpudata->cpu, cpudata->highest_perf, epp,
>  					  cpudata->min_limit_perf,
>  					  cpudata->max_limit_perf,
>  					  policy->boost_enabled);
>  	}
>  
> -	amd_pstate_update_perf(cpudata, cpudata->min_limit_perf, 0U,
> -			       cpudata->max_limit_perf, false);
> -
> -	return amd_pstate_set_epp(cpudata, READ_ONCE(cpudata->epp_cached));
> +	return amd_pstate_update_perf(cpudata, cpudata->min_limit_perf, 0U,
> +				      cpudata->max_limit_perf, epp, false);
>  }
>  
>  static int amd_pstate_epp_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> @@ -1602,7 +1617,7 @@ static int amd_pstate_epp_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static void amd_pstate_epp_reenable(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
> +static int amd_pstate_epp_reenable(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
>  {
>  	u64 max_perf;
>  	int ret;
> @@ -1620,17 +1635,19 @@ static void amd_pstate_epp_reenable(struct amd_cpudata *cpudata)
>  					  max_perf, cpudata->boost_state);
>  	}
>  
> -	amd_pstate_update_perf(cpudata, 0, 0, max_perf, false);
> -	amd_pstate_set_epp(cpudata, cpudata->epp_cached);
> +	return amd_pstate_update_perf(cpudata, 0, 0, max_perf, cpudata->epp_cached, false);
                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
					       
On an MSR based system, none of the values passed here will be used,
and instead the value in cpudata->cppc_req_cached will be used, no?

>  }
>  
>  static int amd_pstate_epp_cpu_online(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  {
>  	struct amd_cpudata *cpudata = policy->driver_data;
> +	int ret;
>  
>  	pr_debug("AMD CPU Core %d going online\n", cpudata->cpu);
>  
> -	amd_pstate_epp_reenable(cpudata);
> +	ret = amd_pstate_epp_reenable(cpudata);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
>  	cpudata->suspended = false;
>  
>  	return 0;
> @@ -1654,10 +1671,8 @@ static int amd_pstate_epp_cpu_offline(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  					  min_perf, min_perf, policy->boost_enabled);
>  	}
>  
> -	amd_pstate_update_perf(cpudata, min_perf, 0, min_perf, false);
> -	amd_pstate_set_epp(cpudata, AMD_CPPC_EPP_BALANCE_POWERSAVE);
> -
> -	return 0;
> +	return amd_pstate_update_perf(cpudata, min_perf, 0, min_perf,
> +				      AMD_CPPC_EPP_BALANCE_POWERSAVE, false);
>  }
>  
>  static int amd_pstate_epp_suspend(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

--
Thanks and Regards
gautham.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-12-09  8:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-08  6:30 [PATCH v2 00/16] amd-pstate fixes and improvements for 6.14 Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 01/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Store the boost numerator as highest perf again Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 02/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Use boost numerator for upper bound of frequencies Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 03/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Add trace event for EPP perf updates Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 04/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: convert mutex use to guard() Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 05/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Drop cached epp_policy variable Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 06/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Use FIELD_PREP and FIELD_GET macros Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 07/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Only update the cached value in msr_set_epp() on success Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 08/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: store all values in cpudata struct in khz Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 09/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Change amd_pstate_update_perf() to return an int Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 10/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Move limit updating code Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 11/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Cache EPP value and use that everywhere Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 12/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Always write EPP value when updating perf Mario Limonciello
2024-12-09  8:42   ` Gautham R. Shenoy [this message]
2024-12-09 16:49     ` Mario Limonciello
2024-12-09 17:15       ` Mario Limonciello
2024-12-10 11:10         ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 13/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Check if CPPC request has changed before writing to the MSR or shared memory Mario Limonciello
2024-12-09  8:56   ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2024-12-09 16:41     ` Mario Limonciello
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 14/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Drop ret variable from amd_pstate_set_energy_pref_index() Mario Limonciello
2024-12-09  9:25   ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 15/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Set different default EPP policy for Epyc and Ryzen Mario Limonciello
2024-12-09  9:27   ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2024-12-08  6:30 ` [PATCH v2 16/16] cpufreq/amd-pstate: Drop boost_state variable Mario Limonciello
2024-12-09 10:24   ` Gautham R. Shenoy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Z1atZRyH3dbWQYjv@BLRRASHENOY1.amd.com \
    --to=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
    --cc=Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
    --cc=perry.yuan@amd.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox