[v1] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode

[PATCH] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode

Posted by Mark Pearson 2 years, 1 month ago

Some new Thinkpads have a new improved performance mode available.
Add support to make this mode usable.

To avoid having to create a new profile, just use the improved performance
mode in place of the existing performance mode, when available.

Tested on T14 AMD G4 AMD.

Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
---
 drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
index ad460417f901..eba701ab340e 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
@@ -10136,6 +10136,7 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
 
 #define DYTC_CMD_SET          1 /* To enable/disable IC function mode */
 #define DYTC_CMD_MMC_GET      8 /* To get current MMC function and mode */
+#define DYTC_CMD_UP_CAP     0xA /* To get Ultra-performance capability */
 #define DYTC_CMD_RESET    0x1ff /* To reset back to default */
 
 #define DYTC_CMD_FUNC_CAP     3 /* To get DYTC capabilities */
@@ -10152,6 +10153,7 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
 
 #define DYTC_FUNCTION_STD     0  /* Function = 0, standard mode */
 #define DYTC_FUNCTION_CQL     1  /* Function = 1, lap mode */
+#define DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS     9  /* Function = 9, TMS mode */
 #define DYTC_FUNCTION_MMC     11 /* Function = 11, MMC mode */
 #define DYTC_FUNCTION_PSC     13 /* Function = 13, PSC mode */
 #define DYTC_FUNCTION_AMT     15 /* Function = 15, AMT mode */
@@ -10163,11 +10165,14 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
 #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_LOWPOWER 3  /* Low power mode */
 #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_BALANCE  0xF  /* Default mode aka balanced */
 #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_DEFAULT  0  /* Default mode from MMC_GET, aka balanced */
+#define DYTC_NOMODE            0xF  /* When Function does not have a mode */
 
 #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_LOWPOWER 3  /* Low power mode */
 #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_BALANCE  5  /* Default mode aka balanced */
 #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_PERFORM  7  /* High power mode aka performance */
 
+#define DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT    8  /* Bit 8 - 1 = supported, 0 = not */
+
 #define DYTC_ERR_MASK       0xF  /* Bits 0-3 in cmd result are the error result */
 #define DYTC_ERR_SUCCESS      1  /* CMD completed successful */
 
@@ -10185,6 +10190,7 @@ static enum platform_profile_option dytc_current_profile;
 static atomic_t dytc_ignore_event = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
 static DEFINE_MUTEX(dytc_mutex);
 static int dytc_capabilities;
+static bool dytc_ultraperf_cap; /* ultra performance capable */
 static bool dytc_mmc_get_available;
 static int profile_force;
 
@@ -10355,6 +10361,17 @@ static int dytc_profile_set(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof,
 	if (err)
 		goto unlock;
 
+	/* Set TMS mode appropriately (enable for performance), if available */
+	if (dytc_ultraperf_cap) {
+		int cmd;
+
+		cmd = DYTC_SET_COMMAND(DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS, DYTC_NOMODE,
+				       profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE);
+		err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
+		if (err)
+			return err;
+	}
+
 	if (dytc_capabilities & BIT(DYTC_FC_MMC)) {
 		if (profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED) {
 			/*
@@ -10429,6 +10446,7 @@ static struct platform_profile_handler dytc_profile = {
 static int tpacpi_dytc_profile_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
 {
 	int err, output;
+	int cmd;
 
 	/* Setup supported modes */
 	set_bit(PLATFORM_PROFILE_LOW_POWER, dytc_profile.choices);
@@ -10484,6 +10502,16 @@ static int tpacpi_dytc_profile_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
 		dbg_printk(TPACPI_DBG_INIT, "No DYTC support available\n");
 		return -ENODEV;
 	}
+	err = dytc_command(DYTC_CMD_UP_CAP, &output);
+	dytc_ultraperf_cap = output & BIT(DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT) ? true : false;
+	if (dytc_ultraperf_cap) {
+		pr_debug("TMS is supported\n");
+		/* Disable TMS by default - only use with performance mode */
+		cmd = DYTC_SET_COMMAND(DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS, DYTC_NOMODE, 0);
+		err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
+		if (err)
+			return err;
+	}
 
 	dbg_printk(TPACPI_DBG_INIT,
 			"DYTC version %d: thermal mode available\n", dytc_version);
-- 
2.41.0

Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode

Posted by Ilpo Järvinen 2 years, 1 month ago

On Wed, 8 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:

> Some new Thinkpads have a new improved performance mode available.
> Add support to make this mode usable.
> 
> To avoid having to create a new profile, just use the improved performance
> mode in place of the existing performance mode, when available.
> 
> Tested on T14 AMD G4 AMD.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> index ad460417f901..eba701ab340e 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> @@ -10136,6 +10136,7 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
>  
>  #define DYTC_CMD_SET          1 /* To enable/disable IC function mode */
>  #define DYTC_CMD_MMC_GET      8 /* To get current MMC function and mode */
> +#define DYTC_CMD_UP_CAP     0xA /* To get Ultra-performance capability */
>  #define DYTC_CMD_RESET    0x1ff /* To reset back to default */
>  
>  #define DYTC_CMD_FUNC_CAP     3 /* To get DYTC capabilities */
> @@ -10152,6 +10153,7 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
>  
>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_STD     0  /* Function = 0, standard mode */
>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_CQL     1  /* Function = 1, lap mode */
> +#define DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS     9  /* Function = 9, TMS mode */
>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_MMC     11 /* Function = 11, MMC mode */
>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_PSC     13 /* Function = 13, PSC mode */
>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_AMT     15 /* Function = 15, AMT mode */
> @@ -10163,11 +10165,14 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_LOWPOWER 3  /* Low power mode */
>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_BALANCE  0xF  /* Default mode aka balanced */
>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_DEFAULT  0  /* Default mode from MMC_GET, aka balanced */
> +#define DYTC_NOMODE            0xF  /* When Function does not have a mode */
>  
>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_LOWPOWER 3  /* Low power mode */
>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_BALANCE  5  /* Default mode aka balanced */
>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_PERFORM  7  /* High power mode aka performance */
>  
> +#define DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT    8  /* Bit 8 - 1 = supported, 0 = not */

It would be preferrable to comment what is supported rather than have a 
comment like above which isn't particularly helpful.

>  #define DYTC_ERR_MASK       0xF  /* Bits 0-3 in cmd result are the error result */
>  #define DYTC_ERR_SUCCESS      1  /* CMD completed successful */
>  
> @@ -10185,6 +10190,7 @@ static enum platform_profile_option dytc_current_profile;
>  static atomic_t dytc_ignore_event = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(dytc_mutex);
>  static int dytc_capabilities;
> +static bool dytc_ultraperf_cap; /* ultra performance capable */
>  static bool dytc_mmc_get_available;
>  static int profile_force;
>  
> @@ -10355,6 +10361,17 @@ static int dytc_profile_set(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof,
>  	if (err)
>  		goto unlock;
>  
> +	/* Set TMS mode appropriately (enable for performance), if available */
> +	if (dytc_ultraperf_cap) {
> +		int cmd;
> +
> +		cmd = DYTC_SET_COMMAND(DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS, DYTC_NOMODE,
> +				       profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE);
> +		err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
> +		if (err)
> +			return err;
> +	}
> +
>  	if (dytc_capabilities & BIT(DYTC_FC_MMC)) {
>  		if (profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED) {
>  			/*
> @@ -10429,6 +10446,7 @@ static struct platform_profile_handler dytc_profile = {
>  static int tpacpi_dytc_profile_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
>  {
>  	int err, output;
> +	int cmd;
>  
>  	/* Setup supported modes */
>  	set_bit(PLATFORM_PROFILE_LOW_POWER, dytc_profile.choices);
> @@ -10484,6 +10502,16 @@ static int tpacpi_dytc_profile_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
>  		dbg_printk(TPACPI_DBG_INIT, "No DYTC support available\n");
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  	}
> +	err = dytc_command(DYTC_CMD_UP_CAP, &output);
> +	dytc_ultraperf_cap = output & BIT(DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT) ? true : false;

It would be better to put this BIT() into the define itself and remove 
_BIT from the name because it doesn't really add that much information.
Since you're assigning to bool, ? true : false construct is not required 
but implicit cast will handle it for you. So in the end, this line would 
be:

	dytc_ultraperf_cap = output & DYTC_UP_SUPPORT;

Looking into the driver a bit more, there are a few other defines which 
could also move BIT() from the code into defines. Please tell if you're 
going to look at those because if not, I might try to make the patches.

> +	if (dytc_ultraperf_cap) {
> +		pr_debug("TMS is supported\n");
> +		/* Disable TMS by default - only use with performance mode */
> +		cmd = DYTC_SET_COMMAND(DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS, DYTC_NOMODE, 0);
> +		err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
> +		if (err)
> +			return err;
> +	}
>  
>  	dbg_printk(TPACPI_DBG_INIT,
>  			"DYTC version %d: thermal mode available\n", dytc_version);
> 

-- 
 i.

Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode

Posted by Mark Pearson 2 years, 1 month ago

Hi Ilpo,

On Thu, Nov 9, 2023, at 5:10 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:
>
>> Some new Thinkpads have a new improved performance mode available.
>> Add support to make this mode usable.
>> 
>> To avoid having to create a new profile, just use the improved performance
>> mode in place of the existing performance mode, when available.
>> 
>> Tested on T14 AMD G4 AMD.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
>> ---
>>  drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
>> index ad460417f901..eba701ab340e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
>> @@ -10136,6 +10136,7 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
>>  
>>  #define DYTC_CMD_SET          1 /* To enable/disable IC function mode */
>>  #define DYTC_CMD_MMC_GET      8 /* To get current MMC function and mode */
>> +#define DYTC_CMD_UP_CAP     0xA /* To get Ultra-performance capability */
>>  #define DYTC_CMD_RESET    0x1ff /* To reset back to default */
>>  
>>  #define DYTC_CMD_FUNC_CAP     3 /* To get DYTC capabilities */
>> @@ -10152,6 +10153,7 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
>>  
>>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_STD     0  /* Function = 0, standard mode */
>>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_CQL     1  /* Function = 1, lap mode */
>> +#define DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS     9  /* Function = 9, TMS mode */
>>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_MMC     11 /* Function = 11, MMC mode */
>>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_PSC     13 /* Function = 13, PSC mode */
>>  #define DYTC_FUNCTION_AMT     15 /* Function = 15, AMT mode */
>> @@ -10163,11 +10165,14 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
>>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_LOWPOWER 3  /* Low power mode */
>>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_BALANCE  0xF  /* Default mode aka balanced */
>>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_DEFAULT  0  /* Default mode from MMC_GET, aka balanced */
>> +#define DYTC_NOMODE            0xF  /* When Function does not have a mode */
>>  
>>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_LOWPOWER 3  /* Low power mode */
>>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_BALANCE  5  /* Default mode aka balanced */
>>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_PERFORM  7  /* High power mode aka performance */
>>  
>> +#define DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT    8  /* Bit 8 - 1 = supported, 0 = not */
>
> It would be preferrable to comment what is supported rather than have a 
> comment like above which isn't particularly helpful.

OK - so  just have:
#define DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT    8  /* Ultra-performance (TMS) mode support */

Or...reading ahead in the review this should actually be
#define DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT    BIT(8)  /* Ultra-performance (TMS) mode support */

>
>>  #define DYTC_ERR_MASK       0xF  /* Bits 0-3 in cmd result are the error result */
>>  #define DYTC_ERR_SUCCESS      1  /* CMD completed successful */
>>  
>> @@ -10185,6 +10190,7 @@ static enum platform_profile_option dytc_current_profile;
>>  static atomic_t dytc_ignore_event = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
>>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(dytc_mutex);
>>  static int dytc_capabilities;
>> +static bool dytc_ultraperf_cap; /* ultra performance capable */
>>  static bool dytc_mmc_get_available;
>>  static int profile_force;
>>  
>> @@ -10355,6 +10361,17 @@ static int dytc_profile_set(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof,
>>  	if (err)
>>  		goto unlock;
>>  
>> +	/* Set TMS mode appropriately (enable for performance), if available */
>> +	if (dytc_ultraperf_cap) {
>> +		int cmd;
>> +
>> +		cmd = DYTC_SET_COMMAND(DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS, DYTC_NOMODE,
>> +				       profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE);
>> +		err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			return err;
>> +	}
>> +
>>  	if (dytc_capabilities & BIT(DYTC_FC_MMC)) {
>>  		if (profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED) {
>>  			/*
>> @@ -10429,6 +10446,7 @@ static struct platform_profile_handler dytc_profile = {
>>  static int tpacpi_dytc_profile_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
>>  {
>>  	int err, output;
>> +	int cmd;
>>  
>>  	/* Setup supported modes */
>>  	set_bit(PLATFORM_PROFILE_LOW_POWER, dytc_profile.choices);
>> @@ -10484,6 +10502,16 @@ static int tpacpi_dytc_profile_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
>>  		dbg_printk(TPACPI_DBG_INIT, "No DYTC support available\n");
>>  		return -ENODEV;
>>  	}
>> +	err = dytc_command(DYTC_CMD_UP_CAP, &output);
>> +	dytc_ultraperf_cap = output & BIT(DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT) ? true : false;
>
> It would be better to put this BIT() into the define itself and remove 
> _BIT from the name because it doesn't really add that much information.
> Since you're assigning to bool, ? true : false construct is not required 
> but implicit cast will handle it for you. So in the end, this line would 
> be:
>
> 	dytc_ultraperf_cap = output & DYTC_UP_SUPPORT;

Agreed. I will make that change.
I'll wait and see if there is any more feedback and then do that with a v2 patch.

>
> Looking into the driver a bit more, there are a few other defines which 
> could also move BIT() from the code into defines. Please tell if you're 
> going to look at those because if not, I might try to make the patches.

Happy to look at doing that as I'm playing around with this driver anyway.

Thanks for the review!
Mark

Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode

Posted by Ilpo Järvinen 2 years, 1 month ago

On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023, at 5:10 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:
> >
> >> Some new Thinkpads have a new improved performance mode available.
> >> Add support to make this mode usable.
> >> 
> >> To avoid having to create a new profile, just use the improved performance
> >> mode in place of the existing performance mode, when available.
> >> 
> >> Tested on T14 AMD G4 AMD.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> >> index ad460417f901..eba701ab340e 100644
> >> @@ -10163,11 +10165,14 @@ static struct ibm_struct proxsensor_driver_data = {
> >>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_LOWPOWER 3  /* Low power mode */
> >>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_BALANCE  0xF  /* Default mode aka balanced */
> >>  #define DYTC_MODE_MMC_DEFAULT  0  /* Default mode from MMC_GET, aka balanced */
> >> +#define DYTC_NOMODE            0xF  /* When Function does not have a mode */
> >>  
> >>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_LOWPOWER 3  /* Low power mode */
> >>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_BALANCE  5  /* Default mode aka balanced */
> >>  #define DYTC_MODE_PSC_PERFORM  7  /* High power mode aka performance */
> >>  
> >> +#define DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT    8  /* Bit 8 - 1 = supported, 0 = not */
> >
> > It would be preferrable to comment what is supported rather than have a 
> > comment like above which isn't particularly helpful.
> 
> OK - so  just have:
> #define DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT    8  /* Ultra-performance (TMS) mode support */
> 
> Or...reading ahead in the review this should actually be
> #define DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT    BIT(8)  /* Ultra-performance (TMS) mode support */

Yes, the latter look good except I'd just drop the "_BIT" suffix from the 
name.

> >> @@ -10484,6 +10502,16 @@ static int tpacpi_dytc_profile_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
> >>  		dbg_printk(TPACPI_DBG_INIT, "No DYTC support available\n");
> >>  		return -ENODEV;
> >>  	}
> >> +	err = dytc_command(DYTC_CMD_UP_CAP, &output);
> >> +	dytc_ultraperf_cap = output & BIT(DYTC_UP_SUPPORT_BIT) ? true : false;
> >
> > It would be better to put this BIT() into the define itself and remove 
> > _BIT from the name because it doesn't really add that much information.
> > Since you're assigning to bool, ? true : false construct is not required 
> > but implicit cast will handle it for you. So in the end, this line would 
> > be:
> >
> > 	dytc_ultraperf_cap = output & DYTC_UP_SUPPORT;
> 
> Agreed. I will make that change.
> I'll wait and see if there is any more feedback and then do that with a v2 patch.
> 
> >
> > Looking into the driver a bit more, there are a few other defines which 
> > could also move BIT() from the code into defines. Please tell if you're 
> > going to look at those because if not, I might try to make the patches.
> 
> Happy to look at doing that as I'm playing around with this driver anyway.

Okay, thanks.

-- 
 i.

Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode

Posted by Mark Pearson 2 years, 1 month ago

Hi Ilpo

On Fri, Nov 10, 2023, at 7:37 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023, at 5:10 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>> > On Wed, 8 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:
<snip>
>> 
>> >
>> > Looking into the driver a bit more, there are a few other defines which 
>> > could also move BIT() from the code into defines. Please tell if you're 
>> > going to look at those because if not, I might try to make the patches.
>> 
>> Happy to look at doing that as I'm playing around with this driver anyway.
>
> Okay, thanks.
>
Just a quick note - I pushed v2 for this patch, and I'll tackle the other BIT changes separately (rather than adding it as part of a series). Looking through the code I wanted to spend more time on that piece - I'm not ignoring it :)

Mark

Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode

Posted by Ilpo Järvinen 2 years, 1 month ago

On Mon, 13 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2023, at 7:37 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023, at 5:10 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 8 Nov 2023, Mark Pearson wrote:
> <snip>
> >> 
> >> >
> >> > Looking into the driver a bit more, there are a few other defines which 
> >> > could also move BIT() from the code into defines. Please tell if you're 
> >> > going to look at those because if not, I might try to make the patches.
> >> 
> >> Happy to look at doing that as I'm playing around with this driver anyway.
> >
> > Okay, thanks.
> >
> Just a quick note - I pushed v2 for this patch, and I'll tackle the 
> other BIT changes separately (rather than adding it as part of a 
> series). Looking through the code I wanted to spend more time on that 
> piece - I'm not ignoring it :) 

Yeah, no problem. I was expecting it separately anyway. :-)

-- 
 i.