On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 3:25 AM Lazar, Lijo <Lijo.Lazar@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [AMD Public Use]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amd-gfx <amd-gfx-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Alex Deucher
> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 9:42 AM
> To: amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Deucher, Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/powerplay/smu10: add support for gpu busy query
>
> Was added in newer versions of the firmware. Add support for it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/rv_ppsmc.h | 1 +
> .../drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/rv_ppsmc.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/rv_ppsmc.h
> index 4c7e08ba5fa4..171f12b82716 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/rv_ppsmc.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/rv_ppsmc.h
> @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@
> #define PPSMC_MSG_PowerGateMmHub 0x35
> #define PPSMC_MSG_SetRccPfcPmeRestoreRegister 0x36
> #define PPSMC_MSG_GpuChangeState 0x37
> +#define PPSMC_MSG_GetGfxBusy 0x3D
> #define PPSMC_Message_Count 0x42
>
> typedef uint16_t PPSMC_Result;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c
> index c932b632ddd4..52fcdec738e9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/smu10_hwmgr.c
> @@ -1261,9 +1261,21 @@ static int smu10_read_sensor(struct pp_hwmgr *hwmgr, int idx,
> void *value, int *size)
> {
> struct smu10_hwmgr *smu10_data = (struct smu10_hwmgr *)(hwmgr->backend);
> - uint32_t sclk, mclk;
> + struct amdgpu_device *adev = hwmgr->adev;
> + uint32_t sclk, mclk, activity_percent;
> + bool has_gfx_busy;
> int ret = 0;
>
> + /* GetGfxBusy support was added on RV SMU FW 30.85.00 and PCO 4.30.59 */
> + if ((adev->apu_flags & AMD_APU_IS_PICASSO) &&
> + (hwmgr->smu_version >= 0x41e3b))
> + has_gfx_busy = true;
> + else if ((adev->apu_flags & AMD_APU_IS_RAVEN) &&
> + (hwmgr->smu_version >= 0x1e5500))
> + has_gfx_busy = true;
> + else
> + has_gfx_busy = false;
> +
> switch (idx) {
> case AMDGPU_PP_SENSOR_GFX_SCLK:
> smum_send_msg_to_smc(hwmgr, PPSMC_MSG_GetGfxclkFrequency, &sclk); @@ -1284,6 +1296,22 @@ static int smu10_read_sensor(struct pp_hwmgr *hwmgr, int idx,
> *(uint32_t *)value = smu10_data->vcn_power_gated ? 0 : 1;
> *size = 4;
> break;
> + case AMDGPU_PP_SENSOR_GPU_LOAD:
> + if (has_gfx_busy) {
> + ret = smum_send_msg_to_smc(hwmgr,
> + PPSMC_MSG_GetGfxBusy,
> + &activity_percent);
> + if (!ret) {
> + activity_percent = activity_percent > 100 ? 100 : activity_percent;
> + } else {
> + activity_percent = 50;
>
> <> Why this is assumed? Isn't this as good as not supported?
I was just to be consistent with what we did for carrizo/stoney. I
can return an error if you prefer.
Alex
>
> Thanks,
> Lijo
>
> + }
> + *((uint32_t *)value) = activity_percent;
> + return 0;
> + } else {
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + }
> + break;
> default:
> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> break;
> --
> 2.29.2
>
> _______________________________________________
> amd-gfx mailing list
> amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Famd-gfx&data=04%7C01%7Clijo.lazar%40amd.com%7C4ae33de1e1cb46155eef08d8e37aaf58%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637509463368911804%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2KX02OYjW4d7%2FFK3dOUz6kiBb8MUItOSOqoDEnu8Lrk%3D&reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> amd-gfx mailing list
> amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
