mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@nvidia.com>
To: <rafael@kernel.org>, <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	<pierre.gondois@arm.com>, <christian.loehle@arm.com>,
	<ionela.voinescu@arm.com>, <zhenglifeng1@huawei.com>,
	<zhanjie9@hisilicon.com>, <lenb@kernel.org>, <ray.huang@amd.com>,
	<mario.limonciello@amd.com>, <perry.yuan@amd.com>,
	<kprateek.nayak@amd.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	<acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <treding@nvidia.com>, <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, <vsethi@nvidia.com>,
	<ksitaraman@nvidia.com>, <sanjayc@nvidia.com>, <mochs@nvidia.com>,
	<bbasu@nvidia.com>, <sumitg@nvidia.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 3/4] cpufreq: CPPC: Preserve OSPM-set registers across hotplug and unload
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 16:08:19 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260916103820.1760297-4-sumitg@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260916103820.1760297-1-sumitg@nvidia.com>

Values written to OSPM-set CPPC registers via sysfs can be lost in two
ways:

  - Across CPU hotplug: the platform may reset a CPU's registers while it
    is offline.
  - On driver unload: the value the driver wrote is left in the register
    instead of returning to its pre-driver state.

Add a small table-driven mechanism that handles both:

  - On init(), capture each register's firmware value before the
    driver programs anything.
  - On offline(), read back each register's current value (whatever was
    last set via sysfs) so it can be reapplied, then restore the firmware
    value.
  - On online(), reapply the value captured at offline() after
    reprogramming the performance controls. A failed write to the controls
    does not skip the reapply, as no other path restores these registers.
  - On exit(), nothing is needed, as the core calls offline() first, which
    already restored the firmware values.

Cover the Autonomous Selection (auto_sel), Energy Performance Preference
(EPP) and Autonomous Activity Window (auto_act_window) registers. Writes
to EPP and auto_act_window only have meaning while auto_sel is enabled,
so write auto_sel before them when enabling it and after them when
disabling it. While autonomous selection stays disabled, the platform may
ignore those writes.

Suggested-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/86780f97-29ee-4a72-b311-38c89434b707@arm.com/
Signed-off-by: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 193 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 190 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
index d7d96fe0da1b..ac315071a979 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
@@ -28,6 +28,183 @@
 
 static struct cpufreq_driver cppc_cpufreq_driver;
 
+/*
+ * OSPM-set CPPC registers tracked for save/restore. A value the OS wrote is
+ * reapplied from online() across CPU hotplug, and the firmware value is
+ * restored from offline().
+ *
+ * Autonomous Selection (auto_sel) is kept first, as the registers after it
+ * only have meaning while it is enabled.
+ */
+enum cppc_saved_reg_id {
+	CPPC_SAVED_AUTO_SEL,
+	CPPC_SAVED_EPP,
+	CPPC_SAVED_AUTO_ACT_WINDOW,
+	CPPC_NR_SAVED_REGS,
+};
+
+struct cppc_saved_reg {
+	const char *name;
+	int (*get)(int cpu, u64 *val);
+	int (*set)(int cpu, u64 val);
+};
+
+static const struct cppc_saved_reg cppc_saved_regs[CPPC_NR_SAVED_REGS] = {
+	[CPPC_SAVED_AUTO_SEL] = {
+		.name = "auto_sel",
+		.get = cppc_get_auto_sel,
+		.set = cppc_set_auto_sel,
+	},
+	[CPPC_SAVED_EPP] = {
+		.name = "epp",
+		.get = cppc_get_epp_perf,
+		.set = cppc_set_epp,
+	},
+	[CPPC_SAVED_AUTO_ACT_WINDOW] = {
+		.name = "auto_act_window",
+		.get = cppc_get_auto_act_window,
+		.set = cppc_set_auto_act_window,
+	},
+};
+
+enum cppc_saved_type {
+	CPPC_SAVED_FIRMWARE,
+	CPPC_SAVED_REQUESTED,
+};
+
+/*
+ * Per-policy values saved for each register in cppc_saved_regs[]:
+ *   firmware_val  - value before the driver touched it, captured at init()
+ *                   and written back when the policy goes offline. U64_MAX
+ *                   if it could not be read
+ *   requested_val - value in effect when the policy last went offline,
+ *                   reapplied at online(). U64_MAX if none
+ */
+struct cppc_saved_vals {
+	u64 firmware_val;
+	u64 requested_val;
+};
+
+struct cppc_policy_state {
+	struct cppc_saved_vals regs[CPPC_NR_SAVED_REGS];
+};
+
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cppc_policy_state, cppc_policy_state);
+
+/*
+ * Per-policy state is kept in the per-CPU variable of the first CPU the policy
+ * manages. related_cpus (the policy's full set of CPUs) never changes while the
+ * policy exists, so this CPU (unlike policy->cpu) stays the same across CPU
+ * hotplug, and every callback reaches the same copy.
+ */
+static struct cppc_policy_state *
+cppc_cpufreq_policy_state(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
+{
+	const struct cpumask *policy_cpus = policy->related_cpus;
+
+	/*
+	 * related_cpus is empty until the core fills it in after init(), so
+	 * fall back to policy->cpus, which has the same first CPU.
+	 */
+	if (cpumask_empty(policy_cpus))
+		policy_cpus = policy->cpus;
+
+	return &per_cpu(cppc_policy_state, cpumask_first(policy_cpus));
+}
+
+/*
+ * Save each register's current value, either as the firmware value, captured
+ * before the driver programs anything, or as the requested value, to reapply
+ * at online().
+ */
+static void cppc_cpufreq_save_regs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
+				   enum cppc_saved_type saved_type)
+{
+	struct cppc_policy_state *st = cppc_cpufreq_policy_state(policy);
+	unsigned int cpu = policy->cpu;
+	u64 val;
+	int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < CPPC_NR_SAVED_REGS; i++) {
+		if (cppc_saved_regs[i].get(cpu, &val))
+			val = U64_MAX;
+
+		if (saved_type == CPPC_SAVED_FIRMWARE) {
+			st->regs[i].firmware_val = val;
+			st->regs[i].requested_val = U64_MAX;
+		} else {
+			st->regs[i].requested_val = val;
+		}
+	}
+}
+
+static u64 cppc_cpufreq_saved_reg_value(const struct cppc_saved_vals *st,
+					enum cppc_saved_reg_id reg,
+					enum cppc_saved_type saved_type)
+{
+	if (saved_type == CPPC_SAVED_FIRMWARE)
+		return st[reg].firmware_val;
+
+	return st[reg].requested_val;
+}
+
+/*
+ * Write one tracked register, skipping it when there is no saved value.
+ * A register the platform does not allow writing is not an error.
+ */
+static void cppc_cpufreq_write_saved_reg(unsigned int cpu,
+					 enum cppc_saved_reg_id reg, u64 val,
+					 enum cppc_saved_type saved_type)
+{
+	const char *op = (saved_type == CPPC_SAVED_FIRMWARE) ?
+			 "restore firmware" : "reapply saved";
+	int ret;
+
+	if (val == U64_MAX)
+		return;
+
+	ret = cppc_saved_regs[reg].set(cpu, val);
+	if (ret == -EOPNOTSUPP)
+		return;
+	if (ret)
+		pr_debug("Failed to %s %s=%llu on CPU%u (%d)\n", op,
+			 cppc_saved_regs[reg].name, val, cpu, ret);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Apply the saved firmware or requested value to each tracked register.
+ *
+ * Write auto_sel first when the value being applied enables autonomous
+ * selection and last when it disables it, so the writes to the dependent
+ * registers can still take effect. While autonomous selection stays disabled,
+ * the platform may ignore those writes. Do not enable it temporarily to force
+ * them through.
+ */
+static void cppc_cpufreq_apply_saved_regs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
+					  enum cppc_saved_type saved_type)
+{
+	const struct cppc_saved_vals *st = cppc_cpufreq_policy_state(policy)->regs;
+	unsigned int cpu = policy->cpu;
+	u64 auto_sel, val;
+	int i;
+
+	auto_sel = cppc_cpufreq_saved_reg_value(st, CPPC_SAVED_AUTO_SEL,
+						saved_type);
+
+	if (auto_sel)
+		cppc_cpufreq_write_saved_reg(cpu, CPPC_SAVED_AUTO_SEL, auto_sel,
+					     saved_type);
+
+	for (i = CPPC_SAVED_AUTO_SEL + 1; i < CPPC_NR_SAVED_REGS; i++) {
+		val = cppc_cpufreq_saved_reg_value(st, i, saved_type);
+		cppc_cpufreq_write_saved_reg(cpu, i, val, saved_type);
+	}
+
+	if (!auto_sel)
+		cppc_cpufreq_write_saved_reg(cpu, CPPC_SAVED_AUTO_SEL, auto_sel,
+					     saved_type);
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_CPUFREQ_FIE
 static enum {
 	FIE_UNSET = -1,
@@ -718,6 +895,8 @@ static int cppc_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
 	policy->cur = cppc_perf_to_khz(caps, caps->highest_perf);
 	cpu_data->perf_ctrls.desired_perf =  caps->highest_perf;
 
+	cppc_cpufreq_save_regs(policy, CPPC_SAVED_FIRMWARE);
+
 	ret = cppc_set_perf(cpu, &cpu_data->perf_ctrls);
 	if (ret) {
 		pr_debug("Err setting perf value:%d on CPU:%d. ret:%d\n",
@@ -791,12 +970,14 @@ cppc_cpufreq_prepare_perf_restore(unsigned int cpu,
  *
  * The platform may have disabled CPPC and reset the performance controls
  * (desired, min and max performance) while the CPU was offline, so re-enable
- * CPPC and reprogram them.
+ * CPPC and reprogram them. Also reapply the OSPM-set registers that offline()
+ * reset to firmware values.
  *
  * Report failures without returning them, or the core would free the policy and
  * leave the CPU without cpufreq. A failed write to the performance controls is
- * not fatal, as the governor's next request programs them again. A failed CPPC
- * enable stops the restore, as the writes that follow may not reach the
+ * not fatal, as the governor's next request programs them again. The OSPM-set
+ * registers are reapplied even then, as no other path restores them. A failed
+ * CPPC enable skips both restores, as the writes that follow may not reach the
  * platform.
  */
 static int cppc_cpufreq_cpu_online(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
@@ -832,6 +1013,8 @@ static int cppc_cpufreq_cpu_online(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
 		pr_debug("Failed to restore perf controls on CPU%u (%d)\n",
 			 cpu, ret);
 
+	cppc_cpufreq_apply_saved_regs(policy, CPPC_SAVED_REQUESTED);
+
 out_fie:
 	/* Restart what offline() stopped, with a new counter snapshot. */
 	cppc_cpufreq_cpu_fie_init(policy);
@@ -851,6 +1034,10 @@ static int cppc_cpufreq_cpu_offline(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
 	unsigned int cpu = policy->cpu;
 	int ret;
 
+	/* Save what the OS set, and leave the platform in its pre-driver state. */
+	cppc_cpufreq_save_regs(policy, CPPC_SAVED_REQUESTED);
+	cppc_cpufreq_apply_saved_regs(policy, CPPC_SAVED_FIRMWARE);
+
 	/*
 	 * Stop the frequency invariance updates and cancel the pending work, so
 	 * that no sample spans the offline window. online() restarts them with
-- 
2.34.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-09-16 10:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-16 10:38 [PATCH v5 0/4] " Sumit Gupta
2026-09-16 10:38 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] cpufreq: CPPC: Keep the policy across CPU hotplug Sumit Gupta
2026-09-16 10:38 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] ACPI: CPPC: Make autonomous selection helpers take a u64 Sumit Gupta
2026-09-16 18:48   ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-09-16 10:38 ` Sumit Gupta [this message]
2026-09-16 10:38 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] cpufreq: CPPC: Preserve OSPM-set registers across suspend/resume Sumit Gupta
2026-09-16 19:04 ` [PATCH v5 0/4] cpufreq: CPPC: Preserve OSPM-set registers across hotplug and unload K Prateek Nayak
2026-09-17  7:13   ` Sumit Gupta

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260916103820.1760297-4-sumitg@nvidia.com \
    --to=sumitg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=bbasu@nvidia.com \
    --cc=christian.loehle@arm.com \
    --cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
    --cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=ksitaraman@nvidia.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
    --cc=mochs@nvidia.com \
    --cc=perry.yuan@amd.com \
    --cc=pierre.gondois@arm.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=ray.huang@amd.com \
    --cc=sanjayc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=treding@nvidia.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=vsethi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=zhanjie9@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=zhenglifeng1@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®