[PATCHv4] drm/amdgpu: disable ASPM on Intel Alder Lake based systems
Alex Deucher
alexdeucher at gmail.com
Wed Apr 20 21:15:23 UTC 2022
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 5:13 PM Gong, Richard <richard.gong at amd.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/20/2022 4:02 PM, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > Dear Richard,
> >
> >
> > Am 20.04.22 um 22:56 schrieb Gong, Richard:
> >
> >> On 4/20/2022 3:48 PM, Paul Menzel wrote:
> >
> >>> Am 20.04.22 um 22:40 schrieb Alex Deucher:
> >>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 4:29 PM Paul Menzel <pmenzel at molgen.mpg.de>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> Am 19.04.22 um 23:46 schrieb Gong, Richard:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 4/14/2022 2:52 AM, Paul Menzel wrote:
> >>>>>>> [Cc: -kernel test robot <lkp at intel.com>]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> […]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Am 13.04.22 um 15:00 schrieb Alex Deucher:
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 3:43 AM Paul Menzel wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for sending out v4.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Am 12.04.22 um 23:50 schrieb Richard Gong:
> >>>>>>>>>> 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.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [Your email program wraps lines in cited text for some reason, making
> >>>>> the citation harder to read.]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I am still not clear, what “hang during suspend/resume” means.
> >>>>>>>>> I guess
> >>>>>>>>> suspending works fine? During resume (S3 or S0ix?), where does
> >>>>>>>>> it hang?
> >>>>>>>>> The system is functional, but there are only display problems?
> >>>>>> System freeze after suspend/resume.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But you see certain messages still? At what point does it freeze
> >>>>> exactly? In the bug report you posted Linux messages.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 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=05%7C01%7Crichard.gong%40amd.com%7C509e0378edcf477605a708da231114f0%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637860853537880384%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=SoXDKGHUiiQN4rcL7FpCotouWFt0kkAbcHyO3esfNlE%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you Microsoft Outlook for keeping us safe. :(
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp at intel.com>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This tag is a little confusing. Maybe clarify that it was for
> >>>>>>>>> an issue
> >>>>>>>>> in a previous patch iteration?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I did describe in change-list version 3 below, which corrected
> >>>>>> the build
> >>>>>> error with W=1 option.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It is not good idea to add the description for that to the commit
> >>>>>> message, this is why I add descriptions on change-list version 3.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do as you wish, but the current style is confusing, and readers of
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> commit are going to think, the kernel test robot reported the problem
> >>>>> with AMD VI ASICs and Intel Alder Lake systems.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 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);
> >>>>>>>>>> + }
> >>>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>>> + return true;
> >>>>>>>>>> +}
> >>>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>>> static void vi_program_aspm(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
> >>>>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>>> u32 data, data1, orig;
> >>>>>>>>>> bool bL1SS = false;
> >>>>>>>>>> bool bClkReqSupport = true;
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> - if (!amdgpu_device_should_use_aspm(adev))
> >>>>>>>>>> + if (!amdgpu_device_should_use_aspm(adev) ||
> >>>>>>>>>> !aspm_support_quirk_check())
> >>>>>>>>>> return;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Can users still forcefully enable ASPM with the parameter
> >>>>>>>>> `amdgpu.aspm`?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>> As Mario mentioned in a separate reply, we can't forcefully
> >>>>>> enable ASPM
> >>>>>> with the parameter 'amdgpu.aspm'.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That would be a regression on systems where ASPM used to work. Hmm. I
> >>>>> guess, you could say, there are no such systems.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> if (adev->flags & AMD_IS_APU ||
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If I remember correctly, there were also newer cards, where
> >>>>>>>>> ASPM worked
> >>>>>>>>> with Intel Alder Lake, right? Can only the problematic
> >>>>>>>>> generations for
> >>>>>>>>> WX3200 and RX640 be excluded from ASPM?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This patch only disables it for the generatioaon that was
> >>>>>>>> problematic.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Could that please be made clear in the commit message summary, and
> >>>>>>> message?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Are you ok with the commit messages below?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please change the commit message summary. Maybe:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> drm/amdgpu: VI: Disable ASPM on Intel Alder Lake based systems
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 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 freeze
> >>>>>> after
> >>>>>> suspend/resume.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Something like:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Intel Alder Lake based systems using ASPM with AMD GFX Volcanic
> >>>>> Islands (VI) cards, like WX3200 and RX640, graphics don’t initialize
> >>>>> when resuming from S0ix(?).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 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.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Which ones?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Add extra check to disable ASPM on Intel Alder Lake based systems
> >>>>>> with
> >>>>>> problematic generation GFX cards.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> … with the problematic Volcanic Islands GFX cards.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Loosely related, is there a public (or internal issue) to
> >>>>>>> analyze how
> >>>>>>> to get ASPM working for VI generation devices with Intel Alder
> >>>>>>> Lake?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As Alex mentioned, we need support from Intel. We don't have any
> >>>>>> update
> >>>>>> on that.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It’d be great to get that fixed properly.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Last thing, please don’t hate me, does Linux log, that ASPM is
> >>>>> disabled?
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not sure what gets logged at the platform level with respect to
> >>>> ASPM, but whether or not the driver enables ASPM is tied to whether
> >>>> ASPM is allowed at the platform level or not so if the platform
> >>>> indicates that ASPM is not supported, the driver won't enable it. The
> >>>> driver does not log whether ASPM is enabled or not if that is what you
> >>>> are asking. As to whether or not it should, it comes down to how much
> >>>> stuff is worth indiciating in the log. The driver is already pretty
> >>>> chatty by driver standards.
> >>>
> >>> I specifically mean, Linux should log the quirks it applies. (As a
> >>> normal user, I’d also expect ASPM to work nowadays, so a message,
> >>> that it’s disabled would help a lot.)
> >>
> >> In general rule we shouldn't generate additional log unless something
> >> went wrong with the system.
> >
> > Please run `dmesg` and see that your statement is false. That’s what
> > log levels are for, and in your case, it would be at least error
> > level. Also, I claim, something indeed went wrong, because a quirk had
> > to be applied. So please add a notice log level, that ASPM gets disabled:
>
> From my previous experience with upstream, the maintainers simply don't
> like adding logs unless absolutely need.
>
> I can add a pr_warn or dev_warn, but I can't guarantee that maintainers
> will take that in my case.
Certainly don't make it a warning.
Alex
>
> >
> > Disable ASPM on Alder Lake with Volcanic Islands card due to resume
> > problems. System energy consumption might be higher than expected.
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Paul
More information about the amd-gfx
mailing list