All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ
@ 2018-01-18  8:51 Akshu Agrawal
  2018-01-18  9:11 ` Viresh Kumar
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Akshu Agrawal @ 2018-01-18  8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: rjw; +Cc: linux-pm, viresh.kumar, satyajit.sahu

In ST/CZ CPUID 8000_0007_EDX[11, ProcFeedbackInterface] is 0,
but the mechanism is still available and can be used.

Change-Id: I5751d92c628da9ad4e15ec34079090c4315d4f2a
Signed-off-by: Akshu Agrawal <akshu.agrawal@amd.com>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c | 11 +++++++++--
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
index 042023bbbf62..be926d9a66e5 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
 #include <linux/types.h>
+#include <linux/pci.h>
 #include <linux/percpu-defs.h>
 #include <linux/init.h>
 #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
@@ -109,12 +110,18 @@ static unsigned int amd_powersave_bias_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
 static int __init amd_freq_sensitivity_init(void)
 {
 	u64 val;
+	struct pci_dev *pcidev;
 
 	if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD)
 		return -ENODEV;
 
-	if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
-		return -ENODEV;
+	pcidev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD,
+			PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_KERNCZ_SMBUS, NULL);
+
+	if (!pcidev) {
+		if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
+			return -ENODEV;
+	}
 
 	if (rdmsrl_safe(MSR_AMD64_FREQ_SENSITIVITY_ACTUAL, &val))
 		return -ENODEV;
-- 
2.13.5

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ
  2018-01-18  8:51 [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ Akshu Agrawal
@ 2018-01-18  9:11 ` Viresh Kumar
  2018-01-18 10:04   ` Agrawal, Akshu
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2018-01-18  9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Akshu Agrawal; +Cc: rjw, linux-pm, satyajit.sahu

On 18-01-18, 14:21, Akshu Agrawal wrote:
> In ST/CZ CPUID 8000_0007_EDX[11, ProcFeedbackInterface] is 0,
> but the mechanism is still available and can be used.
> 
> Change-Id: I5751d92c628da9ad4e15ec34079090c4315d4f2a

??

> Signed-off-by: Akshu Agrawal <akshu.agrawal@amd.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c | 11 +++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> index 042023bbbf62..be926d9a66e5 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>  #include <linux/kernel.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/pci.h>
>  #include <linux/percpu-defs.h>
>  #include <linux/init.h>
>  #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> @@ -109,12 +110,18 @@ static unsigned int amd_powersave_bias_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>  static int __init amd_freq_sensitivity_init(void)
>  {
>  	u64 val;
> +	struct pci_dev *pcidev;
>  
>  	if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD)
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  
> -	if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
> -		return -ENODEV;
> +	pcidev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD,
> +			PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_KERNCZ_SMBUS, NULL);
> +
> +	if (!pcidev) {
> +		if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
> +			return -ENODEV;
> +	}
>  
>  	if (rdmsrl_safe(MSR_AMD64_FREQ_SENSITIVITY_ACTUAL, &val))
>  		return -ENODEV;

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

-- 
viresh

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ
  2018-01-18  9:11 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2018-01-18 10:04   ` Agrawal, Akshu
  2018-01-18 10:11     ` Viresh Kumar
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Agrawal, Akshu @ 2018-01-18 10:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Viresh Kumar; +Cc: rjw, linux-pm, satyajit.sahu



On 1/18/2018 2:41 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 18-01-18, 14:21, Akshu Agrawal wrote:
>> In ST/CZ CPUID 8000_0007_EDX[11, ProcFeedbackInterface] is 0,
>> but the mechanism is still available and can be used.
>>
>> Change-Id: I5751d92c628da9ad4e15ec34079090c4315d4f2a
> 
> ??

unique-id to keep track of changes. Came in because I made the patch on 
a different git.
Removing it and sending a v2.

> 
>> Signed-off-by: Akshu Agrawal <akshu.agrawal@amd.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c | 11 +++++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
>> index 042023bbbf62..be926d9a66e5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>>   #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>   #include <linux/module.h>
>>   #include <linux/types.h>
>> +#include <linux/pci.h>
>>   #include <linux/percpu-defs.h>
>>   #include <linux/init.h>
>>   #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
>> @@ -109,12 +110,18 @@ static unsigned int amd_powersave_bias_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>>   static int __init amd_freq_sensitivity_init(void)
>>   {
>>   	u64 val;
>> +	struct pci_dev *pcidev;
>>   
>>   	if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD)
>>   		return -ENODEV;
>>   
>> -	if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
>> -		return -ENODEV;
>> +	pcidev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD,
>> +			PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_KERNCZ_SMBUS, NULL);
>> +
>> +	if (!pcidev) {
>> +		if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
>> +			return -ENODEV;
>> +	}
>>   
>>   	if (rdmsrl_safe(MSR_AMD64_FREQ_SENSITIVITY_ACTUAL, &val))
>>   		return -ENODEV;
> 
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ
  2018-01-18 10:04   ` Agrawal, Akshu
@ 2018-01-18 10:11     ` Viresh Kumar
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2018-01-18 10:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Agrawal, Akshu; +Cc: rjw, linux-pm, satyajit.sahu

On 18-01-18, 15:34, Agrawal, Akshu wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/18/2018 2:41 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >On 18-01-18, 14:21, Akshu Agrawal wrote:
> >>In ST/CZ CPUID 8000_0007_EDX[11, ProcFeedbackInterface] is 0,
> >>but the mechanism is still available and can be used.
> >>
> >>Change-Id: I5751d92c628da9ad4e15ec34079090c4315d4f2a
> >
> >??
> 
> unique-id to keep track of changes. Came in because I made the patch on a
> different git.
> Removing it and sending a v2.

Yeah, I know its a gerrit thing. Just wanted to point out that you
should drop it :)

-- 
viresh

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ
  2018-01-18 10:42 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2018-02-08 10:03   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2018-02-08 10:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Viresh Kumar, Akshu Agrawal; +Cc: linux-pm, satyajit.sahu

On Thursday, January 18, 2018 11:42:51 AM CET Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 18-01-18, 15:51, Akshu Agrawal wrote:
> > In ST/CZ CPUID 8000_0007_EDX[11, ProcFeedbackInterface] is 0,
> > but the mechanism is still available and can be used.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Akshu Agrawal <akshu.agrawal@amd.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c | 11 +++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> > index 042023bbbf62..be926d9a66e5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/kernel.h>
> >  #include <linux/module.h>
> >  #include <linux/types.h>
> > +#include <linux/pci.h>
> >  #include <linux/percpu-defs.h>
> >  #include <linux/init.h>
> >  #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> > @@ -109,12 +110,18 @@ static unsigned int amd_powersave_bias_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  static int __init amd_freq_sensitivity_init(void)
> >  {
> >  	u64 val;
> > +	struct pci_dev *pcidev;
> >  
> >  	if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD)
> >  		return -ENODEV;
> >  
> > -	if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
> > -		return -ENODEV;
> > +	pcidev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD,
> > +			PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_KERNCZ_SMBUS, NULL);
> > +
> > +	if (!pcidev) {
> > +		if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
> > +			return -ENODEV;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	if (rdmsrl_safe(MSR_AMD64_FREQ_SENSITIVITY_ACTUAL, &val))
> >  		return -ENODEV;
> 
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

Patch applied, thanks!

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ
  2018-01-18 10:21 Akshu Agrawal
@ 2018-01-18 10:42 ` Viresh Kumar
  2018-02-08 10:03   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2018-01-18 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Akshu Agrawal; +Cc: rjw, linux-pm, satyajit.sahu

On 18-01-18, 15:51, Akshu Agrawal wrote:
> In ST/CZ CPUID 8000_0007_EDX[11, ProcFeedbackInterface] is 0,
> but the mechanism is still available and can be used.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Akshu Agrawal <akshu.agrawal@amd.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c | 11 +++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> index 042023bbbf62..be926d9a66e5 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>  #include <linux/kernel.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/pci.h>
>  #include <linux/percpu-defs.h>
>  #include <linux/init.h>
>  #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> @@ -109,12 +110,18 @@ static unsigned int amd_powersave_bias_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>  static int __init amd_freq_sensitivity_init(void)
>  {
>  	u64 val;
> +	struct pci_dev *pcidev;
>  
>  	if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD)
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  
> -	if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
> -		return -ENODEV;
> +	pcidev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD,
> +			PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_KERNCZ_SMBUS, NULL);
> +
> +	if (!pcidev) {
> +		if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
> +			return -ENODEV;
> +	}
>  
>  	if (rdmsrl_safe(MSR_AMD64_FREQ_SENSITIVITY_ACTUAL, &val))
>  		return -ENODEV;

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

-- 
viresh

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ
@ 2018-01-18 10:21 Akshu Agrawal
  2018-01-18 10:42 ` Viresh Kumar
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Akshu Agrawal @ 2018-01-18 10:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: rjw; +Cc: linux-pm, viresh.kumar, satyajit.sahu

In ST/CZ CPUID 8000_0007_EDX[11, ProcFeedbackInterface] is 0,
but the mechanism is still available and can be used.

Signed-off-by: Akshu Agrawal <akshu.agrawal@amd.com>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c | 11 +++++++++--
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
index 042023bbbf62..be926d9a66e5 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/amd_freq_sensitivity.c
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
 #include <linux/types.h>
+#include <linux/pci.h>
 #include <linux/percpu-defs.h>
 #include <linux/init.h>
 #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
@@ -109,12 +110,18 @@ static unsigned int amd_powersave_bias_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
 static int __init amd_freq_sensitivity_init(void)
 {
 	u64 val;
+	struct pci_dev *pcidev;
 
 	if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD)
 		return -ENODEV;
 
-	if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
-		return -ENODEV;
+	pcidev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD,
+			PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_KERNCZ_SMBUS, NULL);
+
+	if (!pcidev) {
+		if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK))
+			return -ENODEV;
+	}
 
 	if (rdmsrl_safe(MSR_AMD64_FREQ_SENSITIVITY_ACTUAL, &val))
 		return -ENODEV;
-- 
2.13.5

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2018-02-08 10:05 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-01-18  8:51 [PATCH] cpufreq: AMD: Ignore the check for ProcFeedback in ST/CZ Akshu Agrawal
2018-01-18  9:11 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-01-18 10:04   ` Agrawal, Akshu
2018-01-18 10:11     ` Viresh Kumar
2018-01-18 10:21 Akshu Agrawal
2018-01-18 10:42 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-02-08 10:03   ` Rafael J. Wysocki

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.