| Message ID | 20220510182221.3990256-1-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [UPDATE] thermal: int340x: Mode setting with new OS handshake | expand |
On Wed, 2022-05-11 at 20:14 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 8:22 PM Srinivas Pandruvada > <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > With the new OS handshake introduced with the commit: "c7ff29763989 > > ("thermal: int340x: Update OS policy capability handshake")", > > thermal zone mode "enabled" doesn't work in the same way as the > > legacy > > handshake. The mode "enabled" fails with -EINVAL using new > > handshake. > > > > To address this issue, when the new OS UUID mask is set: > > - When mode is "enabled", return 0 as the firmware already has the > > latest policy mask. > > - When mode is "disabled", update the firmware with UUID mask of > > zero. > > In this way firmware can take control of the thermal control. Also > > reset the OS UUID mask. This allows user space to update with new > > set of policies. > > > > Fixes: c7ff29763989 ("thermal: int340x: Update OS policy capability > > handshake") > > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada > > <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > This is not -stable material yet. I thought it will wait for 5.19 merge window. > > > --- > > update: > > Added Fixes tag > > > > [...] > > + if (priv->os_uuid_mask) { > > + if (!enabled) { > > + priv->os_uuid_mask = 0; > > + result = set_os_uuid_mask(priv, > > priv->os_uuid_mask); > > This change worries me a bit, because it means replaying an already > established _OSC handshake which shouldn't be done by the spec. > I checked with the firmware team. The _OSC changes dynamically is validated and is recommended when enable/disable user space thermal control. Looking at ACPI Spec "OSPM may evaluate _OSC multiple times to indicate changes in OSPM capability to the device but this may be precluded by specific device requirements" > But I suppose you have tested this? I tested on TigerLake system. > > > + } > > + [...] > > Patch applied as 5.18-rc material, but I've removed some unneeded > parens from the new code, so please double check the result in > bleeding-edge. I tested the patch from bleeding edge. Works fine. Thanks, Srinivas > > Thanks!
diff --git a/drivers/thermal/intel/int340x_thermal/int3400_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/intel/int340x_thermal/int3400_thermal.c index d97f496bab9b..1061728ad5a9 100644 --- a/drivers/thermal/intel/int340x_thermal/int3400_thermal.c +++ b/drivers/thermal/intel/int340x_thermal/int3400_thermal.c @@ -194,12 +194,31 @@ static int int3400_thermal_run_osc(acpi_handle handle, char *uuid_str, int *enab return result; } +static int set_os_uuid_mask(struct int3400_thermal_priv *priv, u32 mask) +{ + int cap = 0; + + /* + * Capability bits: + * Bit 0: set to 1 to indicate DPTF is active + * Bi1 1: set to 1 to active cooling is supported by user space daemon + * Bit 2: set to 1 to passive cooling is supported by user space daemon + * Bit 3: set to 1 to critical trip is handled by user space daemon + */ + if (mask) + cap = ((priv->os_uuid_mask << 1) | 0x01); + + return int3400_thermal_run_osc(priv->adev->handle, + "b23ba85d-c8b7-3542-88de-8de2ffcfd698", + &cap); +} + static ssize_t current_uuid_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buf, size_t count) { struct int3400_thermal_priv *priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); - int i; + int ret, i; for (i = 0; i < INT3400_THERMAL_MAXIMUM_UUID; ++i) { if (!strncmp(buf, int3400_thermal_uuids[i], @@ -231,19 +250,7 @@ static ssize_t current_uuid_store(struct device *dev, } if (priv->os_uuid_mask) { - int cap, ret; - - /* - * Capability bits: - * Bit 0: set to 1 to indicate DPTF is active - * Bi1 1: set to 1 to active cooling is supported by user space daemon - * Bit 2: set to 1 to passive cooling is supported by user space daemon - * Bit 3: set to 1 to critical trip is handled by user space daemon - */ - cap = ((priv->os_uuid_mask << 1) | 0x01); - ret = int3400_thermal_run_osc(priv->adev->handle, - "b23ba85d-c8b7-3542-88de-8de2ffcfd698", - &cap); + ret = set_os_uuid_mask(priv, priv->os_uuid_mask); if (ret) return ret; } @@ -469,17 +476,26 @@ static int int3400_thermal_change_mode(struct thermal_zone_device *thermal, if (mode != thermal->mode) { int enabled; + enabled = (mode == THERMAL_DEVICE_ENABLED); + + if (priv->os_uuid_mask) { + if (!enabled) { + priv->os_uuid_mask = 0; + result = set_os_uuid_mask(priv, priv->os_uuid_mask); + } + goto eval_odvp; + } + if (priv->current_uuid_index < 0 || priv->current_uuid_index >= INT3400_THERMAL_MAXIMUM_UUID) return -EINVAL; - enabled = (mode == THERMAL_DEVICE_ENABLED); result = int3400_thermal_run_osc(priv->adev->handle, int3400_thermal_uuids[priv->current_uuid_index], &enabled); } - +eval_odvp: evaluate_odvp(priv); return result;
With the new OS handshake introduced with the commit: "c7ff29763989 ("thermal: int340x: Update OS policy capability handshake")", thermal zone mode "enabled" doesn't work in the same way as the legacy handshake. The mode "enabled" fails with -EINVAL using new handshake. To address this issue, when the new OS UUID mask is set: - When mode is "enabled", return 0 as the firmware already has the latest policy mask. - When mode is "disabled", update the firmware with UUID mask of zero. In this way firmware can take control of the thermal control. Also reset the OS UUID mask. This allows user space to update with new set of policies. Fixes: c7ff29763989 ("thermal: int340x: Update OS policy capability handshake") Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org --- update: Added Fixes tag .../intel/int340x_thermal/int3400_thermal.c | 48 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)