[PATCHv4] drm/amdgpu: disable ASPM on Intel Alder Lake based systems
Gong, Richard
richard.gong at amd.com
Tue Apr 19 21:08:39 UTC 2022
Hi Nathan,
On 4/13/2022 10:40 AM, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 04:50:00PM -0500, Richard Gong wrote:
>> Active State Power Management (ASPM) feature is enabled since kernel 5.14.
>> There are some AMD GFX cards (such as WX3200 and RX640) that won't work
>> with ASPM-enabled Intel Alder Lake based systems. Using these GFX cards as
>> video/display output, Intel Alder Lake based systems will hang during
>> suspend/resume.
>>
>> The issue was initially reported on one system (Dell Precision 3660 with
>> BIOS version 0.14.81), but was later confirmed to affect at least 4 Alder
>> Lake based systems.
>>
>> Add extra check to disable ASPM on Intel Alder Lake based systems.
>>
>> Fixes: 0064b0ce85bb ("drm/amd/pm: enable ASPM by default")
>> Link: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgitlab.freedesktop.org%2Fdrm%2Famd%2F-%2Fissues%2F1885&data=04%7C01%7Crichard.gong%40amd.com%7C35699b2c088747daedf508da1d63f1f3%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637854612351767549%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=lzgZ3bV0PLFFl9uo3wt6N1dOoZpU2DqpddAk%2BTX8rEI%3D&reserved=0
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp at intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Gong <richard.gong at amd.com>
>> ---
>> v4: s/CONFIG_X86_64/CONFIG_X86
>> enhanced check logic
>> v3: s/intel_core_asom_chk/aspm_support_quirk_check
>> correct build error with W=1 option
>> v2: correct commit description
>> move the check from chip family to problematic platform
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c
>> index 039b90cdc3bc..b33e0a9bee65 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c
>> @@ -81,6 +81,10 @@
>> #include "mxgpu_vi.h"
>> #include "amdgpu_dm.h"
>>
>> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86)
>> +#include <asm/intel-family.h>
>> +#endif
>> +
>> #define ixPCIE_LC_L1_PM_SUBSTATE 0x100100C6
>> #define PCIE_LC_L1_PM_SUBSTATE__LC_L1_SUBSTATES_OVERRIDE_EN_MASK 0x00000001L
>> #define PCIE_LC_L1_PM_SUBSTATE__LC_PCI_PM_L1_2_OVERRIDE_MASK 0x00000002L
>> @@ -1134,13 +1138,24 @@ static void vi_enable_aspm(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
>> WREG32_PCIE(ixPCIE_LC_CNTL, data);
>> }
>>
>> +static bool aspm_support_quirk_check(void)
>> +{
>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86)) {
>> + struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(0);
>> +
>> + return !(c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model == INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE);
>> + }
> I have not seen this reported by a bot, sorry if it is a duplicate. This
> breaks non-x86 builds (arm64 allmodconfig for example):
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c:1144:28: error: implicit declaration of function 'cpu_data' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
> struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(0);
> ^
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c:1144:27: error: cannot take the address of an rvalue of type 'int'
> struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(0);
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c:1146:13: error: incomplete definition of type 'struct cpuinfo_x86'
> return !(c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model == INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE);
> ~^
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c:1144:10: note: forward declaration of 'struct cpuinfo_x86'
> struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(0);
> ^
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c:1146:28: error: incomplete definition of type 'struct cpuinfo_x86'
> return !(c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model == INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE);
> ~^
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c:1144:10: note: forward declaration of 'struct cpuinfo_x86'
> struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(0);
> ^
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/vi.c:1146:43: error: use of undeclared identifier 'INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE'
> return !(c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model == INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE);
> ^
> 5 errors generated.
>
> 'struct cpuinfo_x86' is only defined for CONFIG_X86 so this section
> needs to guarded with the preprocessor, which is how it was done in v2.
> Please go back to that.
Thanks, I will do that.
Regards,
Richard
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
More information about the amd-gfx
mailing list