lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [May]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Implement platform_profile
From
Am 11.05.24 um 17:56 schrieb Shen, Yijun:

> Internal Use - Confidential
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Limonciello, Mario <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2024 11:13 PM
>> To: Shen, Yijun <Yijun_Shen@Dell.com>; Lyndon Sanche
>> <lsanche@lyndeno.ca>
>> Cc: pali@kernel.org; W_Armin@gmx.de;
>> srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com; ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com;
>> lkp@intel.com; Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Matthew Garrett
>> <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>; Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>; Heiner Kallweit
>> <hkallweit1@gmail.com>; Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com>;
>> platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Dell Client
>> Kernel <Dell.Client.Kernel@dell.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Implement platform_profile
>>
>>
>> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/11/2024 10:05 AM, Shen, Yijun wrote:
>>> Internal Use - Confidential
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2024 11:53 PM
>>>> To: Shen, Yijun <Yijun_Shen@Dell.com>; Lyndon Sanche
>>>> <lsanche@lyndeno.ca>
>>>> Cc: pali@kernel.org; W_Armin@gmx.de;
>>>> srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com; ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com;
>>>> lkp@intel.com; Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>; Matthew
>> Garrett
>>>> <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>; Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>; Heiner
>>>> Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>; Vegard Nossum
>>>> <vegard.nossum@oracle.com>; platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org;
>>>> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Dell Client Kernel
>>>> <Dell.Client.Kernel@dell.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: RE: [PATCH v5] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Implement
>>>> platform_profile
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>>>>
>>>> On 5/8/2024 09:24, Shen, Yijun wrote:
>>>>> Hi Lyndon,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for working on this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dell side has an initial testing with this patch on some laptops,
>>>>> it looks
>>>> good. While changing the platform profile:
>>>>> 1. The corresponding USTT option in BIOS will be changed.
>>>>> 2. thermald will not be impacted. The related PSVT and ITMT will be
>> loaded.
>>>>> Some Dell DTs does not have the USTT, Dell'll have a check if
>>>>> nothing is
>>>> broken.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Alex!
>>>>
>>>> Have you had a check both on both your AMD laptops and workstations
>>>> too, or just the Intel ones? I think it would be good to make sure
>>>> it's getting the correct experience in both cases.
>>>>
>>> Hi Mario,
>>>
>>> I've a check for this, for both laptop and workstation, the dell_laptop
>> module will not be loaded. So, AMD platform will not be impacted by this
>> patch series.
>>> Follow is one example output with workstation.
>>> #lsmod | grep dell
>>> dell_wmi 28672 0
>>> dell_smbios 32768 1 dell_wmi
>>> dcdbas 20480 1 dell_smbios
>>> dell_wmi_descriptor 20480 2 dell_wmi,dell_smbios
>>> sparse_keymap 12288 1 dell_wmi
>>> ledtrig_audio 12288 3 snd_ctl_led,snd_hda_codec_generic,dell_wmi
>>> video 73728 2 dell_wmi,nvidia_modeset
>>> wmi 40960 5
>> video,dell_wmi,wmi_bmof,dell_smbios,dell_wmi_descriptor
>> Ah; right that makes sense. In that case, is dell-laptop even the right place for
>> this patch series? I would think the same policies for the platform profile
>> should be able to apply to desktop/workstation.
>>
>> The v6 of this series would block smbios-thermal-ctl from working on a
>> workstation too.
>>
>>>>> Additional, with this patch, follow behavior is found:
>>>>> 1. For example, the platform profile is quiet.
>>>>> 2. Reboot the system and change the USTT to performance.
>>>>> 3. Boot to desktop, the platform profile is "quiet", the USTT
>>>>> will be
>>>> changed back to "quiet".
>>>>> This looks like not a proper user experience. The platform
>>>>> profile should
>>>> honor the BIOS setting, aka, the platform profile should be switched
>>>> to "performance".
>>>> I agree, this sounds like the initial profile needs to be read from
>>>> the BIOS settings too.
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore I wanted to ask is there also a WMI setting that
>>>> corresponds to this that dell-wmi-sysman offers?
>>> Yes, Mario, you're right. This thermal setting could also be toggled by dell-
>> wmi-sysman.
>>> But, for the Dell consumer AMD laptops, like Alienware, the BIOS is another
>> variant which is different with the workstation one.
>>> With this variant BIOS, there is no USTT and also no dell_wmi/dell-wmi-
>> sysman.
>>>> I'm wondering if both should be probed in case the SMBIOS one goes
>> away one day.
>>> Yep, I think this is a good suggestion.
>>>
>> Great! Although something I wonder is if the policy when changed with dell-
>> wmi-sysman is immediate or requires a reboot. A lot of the settings in there
>> aren't effective until after a reboot.
>>
>> If this is one of them then it might not be a good idea to make it work for
>> both.
> Hi Mario,
>
> Just have a check, the check steps are:
> 1. stop the thermald
> 2. run the stress test
> 3. Toggle the thermal setting between UltraPerformance and Quiet via dell-wmi-sysman
> 4. Check the CPU FAN speed
> The system reboot is not needed, the CPU fan speed changes immediately.
> A screen recorder here: https://dell.box.com/s/p2bhd2b6cv8z5buk9eao3bosgrrp1lf9
>
> Thanks
>
Hi,

i believe it should be the responsibility of the manufacturer (in this case Dell) that
the thermal state remains consistent across both interfaces.

I think that the official Windows utility only checks the thermal state reported by
the USTT interface, so we should match this behavior.

Thanks,
Armin Wolf


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 18:25    [W:0.344 / U:0.596 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site