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=-14.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 502C9C433ED for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 12:10:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 083D16145A for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 12:10:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234677AbhDWMKk convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2021 08:10:40 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f50.google.com ([209.85.221.50]:37500 "EHLO mail-wr1-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229479AbhDWMKk (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2021 08:10:40 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f50.google.com with SMTP id j5so47198125wrn.4; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:10:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xDdTkEz3jYFi8dUXVTGarIUd1p+hB/XaUF8ZoHdzxKE=; b=MEQ3EOr9cRHCbLPkOUIRAw7tg76gJEBgk1+qxqtkIxSpjRR5LoQfrKMnMLwZUrMSq0 14x/73SdFEFsPfUzeLX9BLMNnMvVVuEFP0SoLvigXADK478dHt9tUT4oI557Pc6p1kNj ts5rsjpgwpYYkwvQhGLOjfS0QvtWqkZSSsKJZZT648XKK6+x89RBYmiM5OoqQPDpxXIV WYewnY7hDOxffW0AB17EEsfZ5PdkFMEFXgihi6K8OLHNEXZY2zvirpR9yMd2ymhL/n/t N3+q/+30PeoH2evI4sPU28psF2UhxlrKbLvawxjWwy7rBQ09kuhUcW4cUFzIAhLkjDcJ ejdQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5338xnNMqSjG4cR2pl9tvEpouE1LtZNAsPQ4TXya5pBYnodmxO8Q C7r3qqarmakHmS2wanjzaprPjEdIFEkKCtt4IMA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz6Dsd6AmT5Ml2AN3hXNIf0bBPeLJMJ8jJ+HZwLeHyuVBpj92jgtzaurmQeTY9WijsB2pnBut47CZXK3N22T0k= X-Received: by 2002:adf:9d81:: with SMTP id p1mr4477670wre.247.1619179801674; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:10:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210423023928.688767-1-ray.huang@amd.com> In-Reply-To: <20210423023928.688767-1-ray.huang@amd.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 14:09:49 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86, sched: Fix the AMD CPPC maximum perf on some specific generations To: Huang Rui Cc: Linux PM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Alex Deucher , Jason Bagavatsingham , "Pierre-Loup A . Griffais" , Nathan Fontenot , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Borislav Petkov , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Stable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 4:40 AM Huang Rui wrote: > > Some AMD Ryzen generations has different calculation method on maximum > perf. 255 is not for all asics, some specific generations should use 166 > as the maximum perf. Otherwise, it will report incorrect frequency value > like below: > > ~ → lscpu | grep MHz > CPU MHz: 3400.000 > CPU max MHz: 7228.3198 > CPU min MHz: 2200.0000 > > Fixes: 41ea667227ba ("x86, sched: Calculate frequency invariance for AMD systems") > Fixes: 3c55e94c0ade ("cpufreq: ACPI: Extend frequency tables to cover boost frequencies") > > Reported-by: Jason Bagavatsingham > Tested-by: Jason Bagavatsingham > Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=211791 > Signed-off-by: Huang Rui > Cc: Alex Deucher > Cc: Nathan Fontenot > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki > Cc: Borislav Petkov > Cc: x86@kernel.org > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > --- > > Changes from V1 -> V2: > - Enhance the commit message. > - Move amd_get_highest_perf() into amd.c. > - Refine the implementation of switch-case. > - Cc stable mail list. > > Changes from V2 -> V3: > - Move the update into cppc_get_perf_caps() to correct the highest perf value in > the API. > > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 2 ++ > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c | 8 ++++++-- > 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h > index f1b9ed5efaa9..908bcaea1361 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h > @@ -804,8 +804,10 @@ DECLARE_PER_CPU(u64, msr_misc_features_shadow); > > #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD > extern u32 amd_get_nodes_per_socket(void); > +extern u32 amd_get_highest_perf(void); > #else > static inline u32 amd_get_nodes_per_socket(void) { return 0; } > +static inline u32 amd_get_highest_perf(void) { return 0; } > #endif > > static inline uint32_t hypervisor_cpuid_base(const char *sig, uint32_t leaves) > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c > index 347a956f71ca..aadb691d9357 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c > @@ -1170,3 +1170,25 @@ void set_dr_addr_mask(unsigned long mask, int dr) > break; > } > } > + > +u32 amd_get_highest_perf(void) > +{ > + struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &boot_cpu_data; > + u32 cppc_max_perf = 225; > + > + switch (c->x86) { > + case 0x17: > + if ((c->x86_model >= 0x30 && c->x86_model < 0x40) || > + (c->x86_model >= 0x70 && c->x86_model < 0x80)) > + cppc_max_perf = 166; > + break; > + case 0x19: > + if ((c->x86_model >= 0x20 && c->x86_model < 0x30) || > + (c->x86_model >= 0x40 && c->x86_model < 0x70)) > + cppc_max_perf = 166; > + break; > + } > + > + return cppc_max_perf; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(amd_get_highest_perf); > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c > index 69057fcd2c04..58e72b6e222f 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c > @@ -1107,8 +1107,12 @@ int cppc_get_perf_caps(int cpunum, struct cppc_perf_caps *perf_caps) > } > } > > - cpc_read(cpunum, highest_reg, &high); > - perf_caps->highest_perf = high; > + if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD) { This is a generic arch-independent file. Can we avoid adding the x86-specific check here? > + perf_caps->highest_perf = amd_get_highest_perf(); > + } else { > + cpc_read(cpunum, highest_reg, &high); > + perf_caps->highest_perf = high; > + } > > cpc_read(cpunum, lowest_reg, &low); > perf_caps->lowest_perf = low; > -- > 2.25.1 >