IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
After commit 3382388d71 ("intel_rapl: abstract RAPL common code"),
accessing to IOSF_MBI interface is done in the RAPL common code.
Thus it is the CONFIG_INTEL_RAPL_CORE that has dependency of
CONFIG_IOSF_MBI, while CONFIG_INTEL_RAPL_MSR does not.
This problem was not exposed previously because all the previous RAPL
common code users, aka, the RAPL MSR and MMIO I/F drivers, have
CONFIG_IOSF_MBI selected.
Fix the CONFIG_IOSF_MBI dependency in RAPL code. This also fixes a build
time failure when the RAPL TPMI I/F driver is introduced without
selecting CONFIG_IOSF_MBI.
x86_64-linux-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `set_floor_freq_atom':
intel_rapl_common.c:(.text+0x2dac9b8): undefined reference to `iosf_mbi_write'
x86_64-linux-ld: intel_rapl_common.c:(.text+0x2daca66): undefined reference to `iosf_mbi_read'
Reference to iosf_mbi.h is also removed from the RAPL MSR I/F driver.
Fixes: 3382388d71 ("intel_rapl: abstract RAPL common code")
Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230601213246.3271412-1-arnd@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
The current initialization of the struct x86_cpu_id via
pl4_support_ids[] is partial and wrong. It is initializing
"stepping" field with "X86_FEATURE_ANY" instead of "feature" field.
Use X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL macro instead of initializing
each field of the struct x86_cpu_id for pl4_supported list of CPUs.
This X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL macro internally uses another macro
X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE for X86 based CPU matching with
appropriate initialized values.
Reported-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/28ead36b-2d9e-1a36-6f4e-04684e420260@intel.com
Fixes: eb52bc2ae5 ("powercap: RAPL: Add Power Limit4 support for Meteor Lake SoC")
Fixes: b08b95cf30 ("powercap: RAPL: Add Power Limit4 support for Alder Lake-N and Raptor Lake-P")
Fixes: 5157559069 ("powercap: RAPL: Add Power Limit4 support for RaptorLake")
Fixes: 1cc5b9a411 ("powercap: Add Power Limit4 support for Alder Lake SoC")
Fixes: 8365a898fe ("powercap: Add Power Limit4 support")
Signed-off-by: Sumeet Pawnikar <sumeet.r.pawnikar@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Different RAPL Interfaces may have different primitive information and
rapl_defaults calls.
To better distinguish this difference in the RAPL framework code,
introduce a new enum to represent different types of RAPL Interfaces.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Tested-by: Wang Wendy <wendy.wang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
MSR RAPL Interface always removes a rapl_package when all the CPUs in
that rapl_package are offlined. This is because it relies on an online
CPU to access the MSR.
But for RAPL Interface using MMIO registers, when all the cpus within
the rapl_package are offlined,
1. the register can still be accessed
2. monitoring and setting the Power Pimits for the rapl_package is still
meaningful because of uncore power.
This means that, a valid rapl_package doesn't rely on one or more cpus
being onlined.
For this sense, make cpu optional for rapl_package. A rapl_package can
be registered either using a CPU id to represent the physical
package/die, or using the physical package id directly.
Note that, the thermal throttling interrupt is not disabled via
MSR_IA32_PACKAGE_THERM_INTERRUPT for such rapl_package at the moment.
If it is still needed in the future, this can be achieved by selecting
an onlined CPU using the physical package id.
Note that, processor_thermal_rapl, the current MMIO RAPL Interface
driver, can also be converted to register using a package id instead.
But this is not done right now because processor_thermal_rapl driver
works on single-package systems only, and offlining the only package
will not happen. So keep the previous logic.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Tested-by: Wang Wendy <wendy.wang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Currently, a RAPL package is registered with the number of Power Limits
supported in each RAPL domain. But this doesn't tell which Power Limits
are available. Using the number of Power Limits supported to guess the
availability of each Power Limit is fragile.
Use bitmap to represent the availability of each Power Limit.
Note that PL1 is mandatory thus it does not need to be set explicitly by
the RAPL Interface drivers.
No functional change intended.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Tested-by: Wang Wendy <wendy.wang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Add Meteor Lake SoC to the list of processor models for which
Power Limit4 is supported by the Intel RAPL driver.
Signed-off-by: Sumeet Pawnikar <sumeet.r.pawnikar@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Add Alder Lake-N and Raptor Lake-P to the list of processor models
for which Power Limit4 is supported by the Intel RAPL driver.
Signed-off-by: Sumeet Pawnikar <sumeet.r.pawnikar@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Add RaptorLake to the list of processor models for which Power Limit4
is supported by the Intel RAPL driver.
Signed-off-by: Sumeet Pawnikar <sumeet.r.pawnikar@intel.com>
[ rjw: Changelog rewrite ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Add Power Limit4 support for Alder Lake SoC.
Signed-off-by: Sumeet Pawnikar <sumeet.r.pawnikar@intel.com>
Acked-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Enable Hygon Fam18h RAPL support for the power capping framework.
Signed-off-by: Pu Wen <puwen@hygon.cn>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Enable AMD Fam17h RAPL support for the power capping framework.
The support is as per AMD Fam17h Model31h (Zen2) and model 00-ffh
(Zen1) PPR.
Tested by comparing the results of following two sysfs entries and the
values directly read from corresponding MSRs via /dev/cpu/[x]/msr:
/sys/class/powercap/intel-rapl/intel-rapl:0/energy_uj
/sys/class/powercap/intel-rapl/intel-rapl:0/intel-rapl:0:0/energy_uj
Signed-off-by: Victor Ding <victording@google.com>
Acked-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@amd.com>
[ rjw: Changelog edits ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Changes the static struct rapl_msr_priv to a pointer to allow using
a different RAPL MSR interface, preparing for supporting AMD's RAPL
MSR interface.
No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Victor Ding <victording@google.com>
Acked-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@amd.com>
[ rjw: Changelog edits ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
On multi-package systems, the Psys MSR is only valid for CPUs on
specific package (master package). The current code makes the
assumption that package 0 is the master package, but this is not
true on new platforms like SPR.
Fix the problem by emuerating the Psys RAPL domain for every
package, so CPUs in slave packages will read 0 for the Psys energy
counter and only CPUs in master packages can get a valid reading
and register the Psys RAPL domain.
The sysfs I/F for the Psys RAPL domain is not changed.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
[ rjw: Subject and changelog edits ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Modern Intel Mobile platforms support power limit4 (PL4), which is
the SoC package level maximum power limit (in Watts). It can be used
to preemptively limits potential SoC power to prevent power spikes
from tripping the power adapter and battery over-current protection.
This patch enables this feature by exposing package level peak power
capping control to userspace via RAPL sysfs interface. With this,
application like DTPF can modify PL4 power limit, the similar way
of other package power limit (PL1).
As this feature is not tested on previous generations, here it is
enabled only for the platform that has been verified to work,
for safety concerns.
Signed-off-by: Sumeet Pawnikar <sumeet.r.pawnikar@intel.com>
Co-developed-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
intel_rapl driver used to have a list of cpuids, which is used to
1. check if the processor support RAPL MSRs
2. do some cpu model specific setting
3. module autoloading
Now, the cpu model specific setting are moved to intel_rapl_common.c as
part of the common code, because the setup is also needed by RAPL MMIO
interface on those platforms.
But removing the cpuid list from intel_rapl MSR interface driver results
in that the driver can not be loaded automatically.
Maintaining another copy of the cpuid list in intel_rapl_msr.c does not make
sense because it increases the complexity when enabling RAPL support on a
new cpu model.
Fix the problem by creating an "intel_rapl_msr" platform device in the
common code, and make RAPL MSR interface driver (intel_rapl_msr.c) probe the
platform device directly.
Reviewed-by: Pandruvada, Srinivas <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>
Tested-by: Pandruvada, Srinivas <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
RAPL MSR interface supports 2 power limits for package domain, and 1 power
limit for other domains, while RAPL MMIO interface supports 2 power limits
for both package and dram domains.
And when 2 power limits are supported, the FW_LOCK bit is in bit 63 of the
register, instead of bit 31.
Remove the assumption that only pakcage domain supports 2 power limits.
And allow the RAPL interface driver to specify the number of power limits
supported, for every single RAPL domain it owns..
Reviewed-by: Pandruvada, Srinivas <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>
Tested-by: Pandruvada, Srinivas <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
RAPL MMIO interface uses 64 bit registers, thus force use 64 bit register
for all the RAPL code.
Reviewed-by: Pandruvada, Srinivas <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>
Tested-by: Pandruvada, Srinivas <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Split intel_rapl.c to intel_rapl_common.c and intel_rapl_msr.c, where
intel_rapl_common.c contains the common code that can be used by both MSR
and MMIO interface.
intel_rapl_msr.c contains the implementation of RAPL MSR interface.
Reviewed-by: Pandruvada, Srinivas <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>
Tested-by: Pandruvada, Srinivas <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
