mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] ACPI: CPPC: Scale EPP values to the register width
@ 2026-11-12 13:13 Christian Loehle
  2026-11-12 13:58 ` Christian Loehle
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christian Loehle @ 2026-11-12 13:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J . Wysocki, viresh.kumar
  Cc: linux-pm, linux-kernel, sumit.gupta, zhanjie9, superm1,
	zhangpengjie2, Christian Loehle

The EPP sysfs interface uses 0-255, but ACPI permits 4-8 bit fields.
Writing 128 to a 4- or 6-bit SystemMemory field currently succeeds but
stores zero, selecting maximum performance.

Scale writes to supported narrow EPP registers and normalize reads to
0-255. Cover both EPP setters and cppc_get_perf() so saved firmware values
round-trip correctly.

Fixes: 922607a2b462 ("cpufreq: CPPC: Add support for autonomous selection")
Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
---
 .../ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu      |  5 ++
 drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c                      | 46 +++++++++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
index d219fc27a0c9..c63b5cfd993c 100644
--- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
+++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
@@ -322,6 +322,11 @@ Description:	Energy performance preference
 		performance increase/decrease and the result of the hardware's
 		energy efficiency and performance optimization policies.
 
+		For supported EPP registers narrower than eight bits, values are
+		scaled and rounded to the nearest hardware preference.
+		Reads use the same 0-255 scale and may differ from the requested
+		value due to the reduced precision.
+
 		Writing to this file only has meaning when Autonomous Selection is
 		enabled.
 
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
index 11a9f9eb6b4a..10b52163eb56 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
 #include <linux/iopoll.h>
 #include <linux/ktime.h>
 #include <linux/list.h>
+#include <linux/math64.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
 #include <linux/rbtree.h>
 #include <linux/rwsem.h>
@@ -2841,6 +2842,25 @@ int cppc_get_highest_perf(int cpunum, u64 *highest_perf)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_highest_perf);
 
+/* Keep the EPP interface on an 8-bit scale, including firmware readback. */
+static u64 cppc_scale_epp(const struct cpc_register_resource *reg,
+			  u64 epp, bool to_reg)
+{
+	unsigned int width = reg->cpc_entry.reg.bit_width;
+	u32 max;
+
+	if (reg->type != ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER || width < 4 || width >= 8)
+		return epp;
+
+	max = BIT(width) - 1;
+	if (to_reg)
+		return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(epp * max,
+					     CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF);
+
+	return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(epp * CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF,
+				     max);
+}
+
 /**
  * cppc_get_epp_perf - Get the epp register value.
  * @cpunum: CPU from which to get epp preference value.
@@ -2850,7 +2870,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_highest_perf);
  */
 int cppc_get_epp_perf(int cpunum, u64 *epp_perf)
 {
-	return cppc_get_reg_val(cpunum, ENERGY_PERF, epp_perf);
+	struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpunum);
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = cppc_get_reg_val(cpunum, ENERGY_PERF, epp_perf);
+	if (!ret)
+		*epp_perf = cppc_scale_epp(&cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF],
+					   *epp_perf, false);
+
+	return ret;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_epp_perf);
 
@@ -3150,6 +3178,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
 	bool auto_sel_non_pcc;
 	bool epp_pcc;
 	bool epp_non_pcc;
+	u64 epp;
 	int ret;
 
 	if (!cpc_desc) {
@@ -3159,6 +3188,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
 
 	auto_sel_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[AUTO_SEL_ENABLE];
 	epp_set_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF];
+	epp = cppc_scale_epp(epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf, true);
 	if (!enable && auto_sel_reg->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER &&
 	    auto_sel_reg->cpc_entry.int_value == 1)
 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
@@ -3177,7 +3207,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
 			return ret;
 	}
 	if (epp_non_pcc) {
-		ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf);
+		ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, epp);
 		if (ret)
 			return ret;
 	}
@@ -3205,7 +3235,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
 		}
 
 		if (epp_pcc) {
-			ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf);
+			ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, epp);
 			if (ret)
 				goto out_unlock;
 		}
@@ -3235,9 +3265,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_set_epp_perf);
  */
 int cppc_set_epp(int cpu, u64 epp_val)
 {
+	struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpu);
+
 	if (epp_val > CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
+	if (!cpc_desc)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	epp_val = cppc_scale_epp(&cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF],
+				 epp_val, true);
+
 	return cppc_set_reg_val(cpu, ENERGY_PERF, epp_val);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_set_epp);
@@ -3496,7 +3534,7 @@ int cppc_get_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls)
 		if (ret)
 			goto out_err;
 	}
-	perf_ctrls->energy_perf = energy_perf;
+	perf_ctrls->energy_perf = cppc_scale_epp(energy_perf_reg, energy_perf, false);
 
 	if (CPC_SUPPORTED(auto_sel_reg)) {
 		ret = cpc_read(cpu, auto_sel_reg, &auto_sel);
-- 
2.34.1


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] ACPI: CPPC: Scale EPP values to the register width
  2026-11-12 13:13 [PATCH] ACPI: CPPC: Scale EPP values to the register width Christian Loehle
@ 2026-11-12 13:58 ` Christian Loehle
  2026-11-12 14:01   ` Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christian Loehle @ 2026-11-12 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J . Wysocki, viresh.kumar
  Cc: linux-pm, linux-kernel, zhanjie9, superm1, zhangpengjie2, Sumit Gupta

On 11/12/26 13:13, Christian Loehle wrote:
> The EPP sysfs interface uses 0-255, but ACPI permits 4-8 bit fields.
> Writing 128 to a 4- or 6-bit SystemMemory field currently succeeds but
> stores zero, selecting maximum performance.
> 
> Scale writes to supported narrow EPP registers and normalize reads to
> 0-255. Cover both EPP setters and cppc_get_perf() so saved firmware values
> round-trip correctly.
> 
> Fixes: 922607a2b462 ("cpufreq: CPPC: Add support for autonomous selection")
> Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
> ---
>  .../ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu      |  5 ++
>  drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c                      | 46 +++++++++++++++++--
>  2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
> index d219fc27a0c9..c63b5cfd993c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
> @@ -322,6 +322,11 @@ Description:	Energy performance preference
>  		performance increase/decrease and the result of the hardware's
>  		energy efficiency and performance optimization policies.
>  
> +		For supported EPP registers narrower than eight bits, values are
> +		scaled and rounded to the nearest hardware preference.
> +		Reads use the same 0-255 scale and may differ from the requested
> +		value due to the reduced precision.
> +
>  		Writing to this file only has meaning when Autonomous Selection is
>  		enabled.
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> index 11a9f9eb6b4a..10b52163eb56 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
>  #include <linux/iopoll.h>
>  #include <linux/ktime.h>
>  #include <linux/list.h>
> +#include <linux/math64.h>
>  #include <linux/mutex.h>
>  #include <linux/rbtree.h>
>  #include <linux/rwsem.h>
> @@ -2841,6 +2842,25 @@ int cppc_get_highest_perf(int cpunum, u64 *highest_perf)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_highest_perf);
>  
> +/* Keep the EPP interface on an 8-bit scale, including firmware readback. */
> +static u64 cppc_scale_epp(const struct cpc_register_resource *reg,
> +			  u64 epp, bool to_reg)
> +{
> +	unsigned int width = reg->cpc_entry.reg.bit_width;
> +	u32 max;
> +
> +	if (reg->type != ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER || width < 4 || width >= 8)
> +		return epp;
> +
> +	max = BIT(width) - 1;
> +	if (to_reg)
> +		return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(epp * max,
> +					     CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF);
> +
> +	return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(epp * CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF,
> +				     max);
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * cppc_get_epp_perf - Get the epp register value.
>   * @cpunum: CPU from which to get epp preference value.
> @@ -2850,7 +2870,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_highest_perf);
>   */
>  int cppc_get_epp_perf(int cpunum, u64 *epp_perf)
>  {
> -	return cppc_get_reg_val(cpunum, ENERGY_PERF, epp_perf);
> +	struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpunum);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = cppc_get_reg_val(cpunum, ENERGY_PERF, epp_perf);
> +	if (!ret)
> +		*epp_perf = cppc_scale_epp(&cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF],
> +					   *epp_perf, false);
> +
> +	return ret;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_epp_perf);
>  
> @@ -3150,6 +3178,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>  	bool auto_sel_non_pcc;
>  	bool epp_pcc;
>  	bool epp_non_pcc;
> +	u64 epp;
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	if (!cpc_desc) {
> @@ -3159,6 +3188,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>  
>  	auto_sel_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[AUTO_SEL_ENABLE];
>  	epp_set_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF];
> +	epp = cppc_scale_epp(epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf, true);
>  	if (!enable && auto_sel_reg->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER &&
>  	    auto_sel_reg->cpc_entry.int_value == 1)
>  		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> @@ -3177,7 +3207,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>  			return ret;
>  	}
>  	if (epp_non_pcc) {
> -		ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf);
> +		ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, epp);
>  		if (ret)
>  			return ret;
>  	}
> @@ -3205,7 +3235,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>  		}
>  
>  		if (epp_pcc) {
> -			ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf);
> +			ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, epp);
>  			if (ret)
>  				goto out_unlock;
>  		}
> @@ -3235,9 +3265,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_set_epp_perf);
>   */
>  int cppc_set_epp(int cpu, u64 epp_val)
>  {
> +	struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpu);
> +
>  	if (epp_val > CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> +	if (!cpc_desc)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	epp_val = cppc_scale_epp(&cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF],
> +				 epp_val, true);
> +
>  	return cppc_set_reg_val(cpu, ENERGY_PERF, epp_val);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_set_epp);
> @@ -3496,7 +3534,7 @@ int cppc_get_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls)
>  		if (ret)
>  			goto out_err;
>  	}
> -	perf_ctrls->energy_perf = energy_perf;
> +	perf_ctrls->energy_perf = cppc_scale_epp(energy_perf_reg, energy_perf, false);
>  
>  	if (CPC_SUPPORTED(auto_sel_reg)) {
>  		ret = cpc_read(cpu, auto_sel_reg, &auto_sel);

+CC Sumit's actual email, sorry about that.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] ACPI: CPPC: Scale EPP values to the register width
  2026-11-12 13:58 ` Christian Loehle
@ 2026-11-12 14:01   ` Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)
  2026-11-12 14:05     ` Christian Loehle
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel) @ 2026-11-12 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Christian Loehle
  Cc: Rafael J . Wysocki, viresh.kumar, linux-pm, linux-kernel,
	zhanjie9, superm1, zhangpengjie2, Sumit Gupta

On Thu, Nov 12, 2026 at 2:58 PM Christian Loehle
<christian.loehle@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/12/26 13:13, Christian Loehle wrote:
> > The EPP sysfs interface uses 0-255, but ACPI permits 4-8 bit fields.
> > Writing 128 to a 4- or 6-bit SystemMemory field currently succeeds but
> > stores zero, selecting maximum performance.
> >
> > Scale writes to supported narrow EPP registers and normalize reads to
> > 0-255. Cover both EPP setters and cppc_get_perf() so saved firmware values
> > round-trip correctly.
> >
> > Fixes: 922607a2b462 ("cpufreq: CPPC: Add support for autonomous selection")
> > Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
> > ---
> >  .../ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu      |  5 ++
> >  drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c                      | 46 +++++++++++++++++--
> >  2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
> > index d219fc27a0c9..c63b5cfd993c 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
> > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
> > @@ -322,6 +322,11 @@ Description:     Energy performance preference
> >               performance increase/decrease and the result of the hardware's
> >               energy efficiency and performance optimization policies.
> >
> > +             For supported EPP registers narrower than eight bits, values are
> > +             scaled and rounded to the nearest hardware preference.
> > +             Reads use the same 0-255 scale and may differ from the requested
> > +             value due to the reduced precision.
> > +
> >               Writing to this file only has meaning when Autonomous Selection is
> >               enabled.
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> > index 11a9f9eb6b4a..10b52163eb56 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
> > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/iopoll.h>
> >  #include <linux/ktime.h>
> >  #include <linux/list.h>
> > +#include <linux/math64.h>
> >  #include <linux/mutex.h>
> >  #include <linux/rbtree.h>
> >  #include <linux/rwsem.h>
> > @@ -2841,6 +2842,25 @@ int cppc_get_highest_perf(int cpunum, u64 *highest_perf)
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_highest_perf);
> >
> > +/* Keep the EPP interface on an 8-bit scale, including firmware readback. */
> > +static u64 cppc_scale_epp(const struct cpc_register_resource *reg,
> > +                       u64 epp, bool to_reg)
> > +{
> > +     unsigned int width = reg->cpc_entry.reg.bit_width;
> > +     u32 max;
> > +
> > +     if (reg->type != ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER || width < 4 || width >= 8)
> > +             return epp;
> > +
> > +     max = BIT(width) - 1;
> > +     if (to_reg)
> > +             return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(epp * max,
> > +                                          CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF);
> > +
> > +     return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(epp * CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF,
> > +                                  max);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * cppc_get_epp_perf - Get the epp register value.
> >   * @cpunum: CPU from which to get epp preference value.
> > @@ -2850,7 +2870,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_highest_perf);
> >   */
> >  int cppc_get_epp_perf(int cpunum, u64 *epp_perf)
> >  {
> > -     return cppc_get_reg_val(cpunum, ENERGY_PERF, epp_perf);
> > +     struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpunum);
> > +     int ret;
> > +
> > +     ret = cppc_get_reg_val(cpunum, ENERGY_PERF, epp_perf);
> > +     if (!ret)
> > +             *epp_perf = cppc_scale_epp(&cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF],
> > +                                        *epp_perf, false);
> > +
> > +     return ret;
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_epp_perf);
> >
> > @@ -3150,6 +3178,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
> >       bool auto_sel_non_pcc;
> >       bool epp_pcc;
> >       bool epp_non_pcc;
> > +     u64 epp;
> >       int ret;
> >
> >       if (!cpc_desc) {
> > @@ -3159,6 +3188,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
> >
> >       auto_sel_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[AUTO_SEL_ENABLE];
> >       epp_set_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF];
> > +     epp = cppc_scale_epp(epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf, true);
> >       if (!enable && auto_sel_reg->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER &&
> >           auto_sel_reg->cpc_entry.int_value == 1)
> >               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > @@ -3177,7 +3207,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
> >                       return ret;
> >       }
> >       if (epp_non_pcc) {
> > -             ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf);
> > +             ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, epp);
> >               if (ret)
> >                       return ret;
> >       }
> > @@ -3205,7 +3235,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
> >               }
> >
> >               if (epp_pcc) {
> > -                     ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf);
> > +                     ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, epp);
> >                       if (ret)
> >                               goto out_unlock;
> >               }
> > @@ -3235,9 +3265,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_set_epp_perf);
> >   */
> >  int cppc_set_epp(int cpu, u64 epp_val)
> >  {
> > +     struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpu);
> > +
> >       if (epp_val > CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF)
> >               return -EINVAL;
> >
> > +     if (!cpc_desc)
> > +             return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +     epp_val = cppc_scale_epp(&cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF],
> > +                              epp_val, true);
> > +
> >       return cppc_set_reg_val(cpu, ENERGY_PERF, epp_val);
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_set_epp);
> > @@ -3496,7 +3534,7 @@ int cppc_get_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls)
> >               if (ret)
> >                       goto out_err;
> >       }
> > -     perf_ctrls->energy_perf = energy_perf;
> > +     perf_ctrls->energy_perf = cppc_scale_epp(energy_perf_reg, energy_perf, false);
> >
> >       if (CPC_SUPPORTED(auto_sel_reg)) {
> >               ret = cpc_read(cpu, auto_sel_reg, &auto_sel);
>
> +CC Sumit's actual email, sorry about that.

So I'm assuming that this one is for Sumit to pick up and send again
along with a new version of

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20261112080442.4007723-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/

Or please let me know if that is not the case.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] ACPI: CPPC: Scale EPP values to the register width
  2026-11-12 14:01   ` Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)
@ 2026-11-12 14:05     ` Christian Loehle
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christian Loehle @ 2026-11-12 14:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)
  Cc: viresh.kumar, linux-pm, linux-kernel, zhanjie9, superm1,
	zhangpengjie2, Sumit Gupta

On 11/12/26 14:01, Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel) wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2026 at 2:58 PM Christian Loehle
> <christian.loehle@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/12/26 13:13, Christian Loehle wrote:
>>> The EPP sysfs interface uses 0-255, but ACPI permits 4-8 bit fields.
>>> Writing 128 to a 4- or 6-bit SystemMemory field currently succeeds but
>>> stores zero, selecting maximum performance.
>>>
>>> Scale writes to supported narrow EPP registers and normalize reads to
>>> 0-255. Cover both EPP setters and cppc_get_perf() so saved firmware values
>>> round-trip correctly.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 922607a2b462 ("cpufreq: CPPC: Add support for autonomous selection")
>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>>  .../ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu      |  5 ++
>>>  drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c                      | 46 +++++++++++++++++--
>>>  2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
>>> index d219fc27a0c9..c63b5cfd993c 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
>>> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu
>>> @@ -322,6 +322,11 @@ Description:     Energy performance preference
>>>               performance increase/decrease and the result of the hardware's
>>>               energy efficiency and performance optimization policies.
>>>
>>> +             For supported EPP registers narrower than eight bits, values are
>>> +             scaled and rounded to the nearest hardware preference.
>>> +             Reads use the same 0-255 scale and may differ from the requested
>>> +             value due to the reduced precision.
>>> +
>>>               Writing to this file only has meaning when Autonomous Selection is
>>>               enabled.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>>> index 11a9f9eb6b4a..10b52163eb56 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>>> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
>>>  #include <linux/iopoll.h>
>>>  #include <linux/ktime.h>
>>>  #include <linux/list.h>
>>> +#include <linux/math64.h>
>>>  #include <linux/mutex.h>
>>>  #include <linux/rbtree.h>
>>>  #include <linux/rwsem.h>
>>> @@ -2841,6 +2842,25 @@ int cppc_get_highest_perf(int cpunum, u64 *highest_perf)
>>>  }
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_highest_perf);
>>>
>>> +/* Keep the EPP interface on an 8-bit scale, including firmware readback. */
>>> +static u64 cppc_scale_epp(const struct cpc_register_resource *reg,
>>> +                       u64 epp, bool to_reg)
>>> +{
>>> +     unsigned int width = reg->cpc_entry.reg.bit_width;
>>> +     u32 max;
>>> +
>>> +     if (reg->type != ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER || width < 4 || width >= 8)
>>> +             return epp;
>>> +
>>> +     max = BIT(width) - 1;
>>> +     if (to_reg)
>>> +             return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(epp * max,
>>> +                                          CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF);
>>> +
>>> +     return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(epp * CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF,
>>> +                                  max);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>  /**
>>>   * cppc_get_epp_perf - Get the epp register value.
>>>   * @cpunum: CPU from which to get epp preference value.
>>> @@ -2850,7 +2870,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_highest_perf);
>>>   */
>>>  int cppc_get_epp_perf(int cpunum, u64 *epp_perf)
>>>  {
>>> -     return cppc_get_reg_val(cpunum, ENERGY_PERF, epp_perf);
>>> +     struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpunum);
>>> +     int ret;
>>> +
>>> +     ret = cppc_get_reg_val(cpunum, ENERGY_PERF, epp_perf);
>>> +     if (!ret)
>>> +             *epp_perf = cppc_scale_epp(&cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF],
>>> +                                        *epp_perf, false);
>>> +
>>> +     return ret;
>>>  }
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_get_epp_perf);
>>>
>>> @@ -3150,6 +3178,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>>>       bool auto_sel_non_pcc;
>>>       bool epp_pcc;
>>>       bool epp_non_pcc;
>>> +     u64 epp;
>>>       int ret;
>>>
>>>       if (!cpc_desc) {
>>> @@ -3159,6 +3188,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>>>
>>>       auto_sel_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[AUTO_SEL_ENABLE];
>>>       epp_set_reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF];
>>> +     epp = cppc_scale_epp(epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf, true);
>>>       if (!enable && auto_sel_reg->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER &&
>>>           auto_sel_reg->cpc_entry.int_value == 1)
>>>               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> @@ -3177,7 +3207,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>>>                       return ret;
>>>       }
>>>       if (epp_non_pcc) {
>>> -             ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf);
>>> +             ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, epp);
>>>               if (ret)
>>>                       return ret;
>>>       }
>>> @@ -3205,7 +3235,7 @@ int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>>>               }
>>>
>>>               if (epp_pcc) {
>>> -                     ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, perf_ctrls->energy_perf);
>>> +                     ret = cpc_write(cpu, epp_set_reg, epp);
>>>                       if (ret)
>>>                               goto out_unlock;
>>>               }
>>> @@ -3235,9 +3265,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_set_epp_perf);
>>>   */
>>>  int cppc_set_epp(int cpu, u64 epp_val)
>>>  {
>>> +     struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, cpu);
>>> +
>>>       if (epp_val > CPPC_EPP_ENERGY_EFFICIENCY_PREF)
>>>               return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>> +     if (!cpc_desc)
>>> +             return -ENODEV;
>>> +
>>> +     epp_val = cppc_scale_epp(&cpc_desc->cpc_regs[ENERGY_PERF],
>>> +                              epp_val, true);
>>> +
>>>       return cppc_set_reg_val(cpu, ENERGY_PERF, epp_val);
>>>  }
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cppc_set_epp);
>>> @@ -3496,7 +3534,7 @@ int cppc_get_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls)
>>>               if (ret)
>>>                       goto out_err;
>>>       }
>>> -     perf_ctrls->energy_perf = energy_perf;
>>> +     perf_ctrls->energy_perf = cppc_scale_epp(energy_perf_reg, energy_perf, false);
>>>
>>>       if (CPC_SUPPORTED(auto_sel_reg)) {
>>>               ret = cpc_read(cpu, auto_sel_reg, &auto_sel);
>>
>> +CC Sumit's actual email, sorry about that.
> 
> So I'm assuming that this one is for Sumit to pick up and send again
> along with a new version of
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20261112080442.4007723-1-sumitg@nvidia.com/
> 
> Or please let me know if that is not the case.

Yup, while it fixes an issue by itself technically, I don't think there
are any affected platforms.
I'm hoping that Sumit this (and the limit-write-at-init) patch as a series
for all our convenience (and hopefully to get Sashiko to review them too).
(I guess I should've mentioned that in the notes.)

And sorry about ACPI/CPPC having such high traffic lately, I'm expecting once
we've got the issues ironed out and the new features supported it'll be a
lot more boring :)

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2026-11-12 14:06 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-11-12 13:13 [PATCH] ACPI: CPPC: Scale EPP values to the register width Christian Loehle
2026-11-12 13:58 ` Christian Loehle
2026-11-12 14:01   ` Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)
2026-11-12 14:05     ` Christian Loehle

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®