Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 12 May 2024 19:53:28 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Implement platform_profile | From | Armin Wolf <> |
| |
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
| |