Compared with existing RAPL MSR/MMIO Interface, the RAPL TPMI Interface
1. has per Power Limit register, thus has per Power Limit Lock and
Enable bit.
2. doesn't have Power Limit Clamp bit.
3. the Power Limit Lock and Enable bits have different bit offsets.
These mean RAPL TPMI Interface needs its own primitive information.
RAPL TPMI Interface also has per domain unit register but with a
different register layout. This requires a TPMI specific rapl_defaults
call to decode the unit register.
Introduce the RAPL core support for TPMI Interface.
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>
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>
With RAPL MSR/MMIO Interface, each RAPL domain has one Power Limit
register. Each Power Limit register has one lock bit which tells the OS
if the power limit register can be used or not.
Depending on the number of power limits supported by the power limit
register, the lock bit may apply to one or more power limits.
With RAPL TPMI Interface, each RAPL domain has multiple Power Limits,
and each Power Limit has its own register, with a lock bit.
To handle this, introduce support for lock bit per Power Limit.
For existing RAPL MSR/MMIO Interfaces, the lock bit in the Power Limit
register applies to all the Power Limits controlled by this register.
Remove the per domain DOMAIN_STATE_BIOS_LOCKED flag at the same time
because it can be replaced by the per Power Limit lock.
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>
The same set of operations are shared by different Powert Limits,
including Power Limit get/set, Power Limit enable/disable, clamping
enable/disable, time window get/set, and max power get/set, etc.
But the same operation for different Power Limit has different
primitives because they use different registers/register bits.
A lot of dirty/duplicate code was introduced to handle this difference.
Introduce a universal way to issue Power Limit operations.
Instead of using hardcoded primitive name directly, use Power Limit id
+ operation type, and hide all the Power Limit difference details in a
central place, get_pl_prim(). Two helpers, rapl_read_pl_data() and
rapl_write_pl_data(), are introduced at the same time to simplify the
code for issuing Power Limit operations.
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>
The same set of operations are shared by different Powert Limits,
including Power Limit get/set, Power Limit enable/disable, clamping
enable/disable, time window get/set, and max power get/set, etc.
But the same operation for different Power Limit has different
primitives because they use different registers/register bits.
A lot of dirty/duplicate code was introduced to handle this difference.
Instead of using hardcoded primitive name directly, using Power Limit id
+ operation type is much cleaner.
For this sense, move POWER_LIMIT1/POWER_LIMIT2/POWER_LIMIT4 to the
beginning of enum rapl_primitives so that they can be reused as
Power Limit ids.
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>
RAPL MSR/MMIO Interface has package scope unit register but some RAPL
domains like Dram/Psys may use a fixed energy unit value instead of the
default unit value on certain platforms.
RAPL TPMI Interface supports per domain unit register.
For the above reasons, add support for per domain unit register and per
domain energy/power/time unit.
When per domain unit register is not available, use the package scope
unit register as the per domain unit register for each RAPL domain so
that this change is transparent to MSR/MMIO Interface.
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>
RAPL primitive information is Interface specific.
Although current MSR and MMIO Interface share the same RAPL primitives,
new Interface like TPMI has its own RAPL primitive information.
Save the primitive information in the Interface private structure.
Plus, using variant name "rp" for struct rapl_primitive_info is
confusing because "rp" is also used for struct rapl_package.
Use "rpi" as the variant name for struct rapl_primitive_info, and rename
the previous rpi[] array to avoid conflict.
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>
rapl_defaults is Interface specific.
Although current MSR and MMIO Interface share the same rapl_defaults,
new Interface like TPMI need its own rapl_defaults callbacks.
Save the rapl_defaults information in the Interface private structure.
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>
After commit f1e8d7560d ("powercap/intel_rapl: enumerate Psys RAPL
domain together with package RAPL domain"), the platform_rapl_domain field
is not used anymore. Remove it from rapl_if_priv structure.
Fixes: f1e8d7560d ("powercap/intel_rapl: enumerate Psys RAPL domain together with package RAPL domain")
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
On Sapphire Rapids, the layout of the Psys domain Power Limit Register
is different from from what it was before.
Enhance the code to support the new Psys PL register layout.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Reported-and-tested-by: Alkattan Dana <dana.alkattan@intel.com>
[ rjw: Subject and changelog edits ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
struct rapl_package is declared twice in intel_rapl.h, once at line 80
and once earlier.
Code inspection suggests that the first instance should be struct
rapl_domain rather than rapl_package, so change it.
Signed-off-by: Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com>
[ rjw: Subject and 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>
Fixes: 7ebf8eff63 ("intel_rapl: introduce struct rapl_if_private")
Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
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>
MSR and MMIO RAPL interfaces have different ways to access the registers,
thus in order to abstract the register access operations, two callbacks,
.read_raw()/.write_raw() are introduced, and they should be implemented by
MSR RAPL and MMIO RAPL interface driver respectly.
This patch implements them for the MSR I/F only.
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>
MSR and MMIO RAPL interface have different sets of registers, thus the
RAPL register address should be obtained from interface specific
structure, i.e. struct rapl_if_private, instead.
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>
Introduce a new structure, rapl_if_private, to save the private data
for different RAPL 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>
Create a new header file for the common definitions that might be used
by different RAPL 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>
Zhang Rui