Hi, On 10/9/21 4:05 AM, Sachi King wrote: > On Saturday, 9 October 2021 06:01:53 AEDT Limonciello, Mario wrote: >> On 10/8/2021 10:57, Limonciello, Mario wrote: >>> On 10/8/2021 07:19, Sachi King wrote: >>>> On Friday, 8 October 2021 21:27:15 AEDT Shyam Sundar S K wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 10/8/2021 1:30 AM, Limonciello, Mario wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 10/5/2021 00:16, Shyam Sundar S K wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 10/2/2021 9:48 AM, Sachi King wrote: >>>>>>>> The Surface Laptop 4 AMD has used the AMD0005 to identify this >>>>>>>> controller instead of using the appropriate ACPI ID AMDI0005. >>>>>>>> Include >>>>>>>> AMD0005 in the acpi id list. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can you provide an ACPI dump and output of 'cat /sys/power/mem_sleep' >>>>>> >>>>>> I had a look through the acpidump listed there and it seems like the >>>>>> PEP >>>>>> device is filled with a lot of NO-OP type of code. This means the LPS0 >>>>>> patch really isn't "needed", but still may be a good idea to include >>>>>> for >>>>>> completeness in case there ends up being a design based upon this that >>>>>> does need it. >>>>>> >>>>>> As for this one (the amd-pmc patch) how are things working with it? >>>>>> Have >>>>>> you checked power consumption >>>> >>>> Using my rather limited plug-in power meter I measure 1w with this patch, >>>> and I've never seen the meter go below this reading, so this may be over >>>> reporting. Without this patch however the device bounces around >>>> 2.2-2.5w. >>>> The device consumes 6w with the display off. >>>> >>>> I have not left the device for long periods of time to see what the >>>> battery >>>> consumption is over a period of time, however this patch is being carried >>>> in linux-surface in advance and one users suspend power consumption is >>>> looking good. They have reported 2 hours of suspend without a noticable >>>> power drop from the battery indicator. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Thanks, in that case this is certainly part of what you'll need and it >>> sounds like you're on the right train as it pertains to the wakeup sources. >>> >>> For both patches in this series: >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> >>> >>>> >>>>>> and verified that the amd_pmc debugfs >>>>>> statistics are increasing? >>>> >>>> s0ix_stats included following smu_fw_info below. >>>> >>>>>> Is the system able to resume from s2idle? >>>> >>>> It does, however additional patches are required to do so without an >>>> external >>>> device such as a keyboard. The power button, lid, and power plug trigger >>>> events via pinctrl-amd. Keyboard and trackpad go via the Surface EC and >>>> require the surface_* drivers, which do not have wakeup support. >>>> >>>> 1. The AMDI0031 pinctrl-amd device is setup on Interrupt 7, however >>>> the APIC >>>> table does not define an interrupt source override. Right now I'm not >>>> sure >>>> how approach producing a quirk for this. linux-surface is carrying >>>> the hack >>>> described in >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Flkml%2F87lf8ddjqx.ffs%40nanos.tec.linutronix.de%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cb95422d699a2496a56f608d98a55e888%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637692923846585025%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=5dWwpgh%2FRIA%2F57UpY5h0l9Snzem%2BNpirgE6ujEHO7aY%3D&reserved=0 >>>> >>>> Also available here: >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Flinux-surface%2Fkernel%2Fcommit%2F25baf27d6d76f068ab8e7cb7a5be33218ac9bd6b&data=04%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cb95422d699a2496a56f608d98a55e888%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637692923846585025%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=HPZfqPoVUJT8w%2FRD7UaVjegT0iRLDlRkXfOwMx5HS8Q%3D&reserved=0 >>>> >>>> >>>> 2. pinctrl: amd: Handle wake-up interrupt >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.kernel.org%2Ftorvalds%2Fc%2Facd47b9f28e5&data=04%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cb95422d699a2496a56f608d98a55e888%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637692923846585025%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=gUtHcFKolVIZeHtIIJuT3BkruQbjq8NAOU5504%2F02Mg%3D&reserved=0 >>>> >>>> Without this patch the device would suspend, but any interrupt via >>>> pinctrl-amd would result in a failed resume, which is every wakeup >>>> souce I know of on this device. >>> >>> Yes that was the same experience a number of us had on other AMD based >>> platforms as well which led to this patch being submitted. >>> >>>> >>>> 3. pinctrl: amd: disable and mask interrupts on probe >>>> Once I worked out that I needed the patch in 2 above the device gets a >>>> lot >>>> of spurious wakeups, largely because Surface devices have a second >>>> embedded >>>> controller that wants to wake the device on all sorts of events. We >>>> don't >>>> have support for that, and there were a number of interrupts not >>>> configured >>>> by linux that were set enabled, unmasked, and wake in s0i3 on boot. >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Flinux-gpio%2F20211001161714.2053597-1-nakato%40nakato.io%2FT%2F%23t&data=04%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cb95422d699a2496a56f608d98a55e888%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637692923846585025%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=mwJgcXBY9zdlTG671KssViHdSwHfq6DCJ2fpeLbRbR4%3D&reserved=0 >>>> >>> >>> We'll have to take a look at this to make sure it's not causing a >>> regression for the other platforms the original patch helped. If it >>> does, then we'll need some sort of other messaging to accomplish this >>> for the surface devices. >>> >>>> >>>> These three are enough to be able to wake the device via a lid event, >>>> or by >>>> changing the state of the power cable. >>>> >>>> 4. The power button requires another pair of patches. These are only >>>> in the >>>> linux-surface kernel as qzed would like to run them there for a couple of >>>> releases before we propose them upstream. These patches change the >>>> method >>>> used to determine if we should load surfacepro3-button or >>>> soc-button-array. >>>> The AMD variant Surface Laptops were loading surfacepro3-button instead >>>> soc-button-array. They can be seen: >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Flinux-surface%2Fkernel%2Fcommit%2F1927c0b30e5cd95a566a23b6926472bc2be54f42&data=04%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cb95422d699a2496a56f608d98a55e888%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637692923846585025%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=PGWON0kCpByJtsO1rS9wrYr7oH86V%2F8M%2FYLmUoFjBhM%3D&reserved=0 >>>> >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Flinux-surface%2Fkernel%2Fcommit%2Fac1a977392880456f61e830a95e368cad7a0fa3f&data=04%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cb95422d699a2496a56f608d98a55e888%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637692923846585025%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=B%2BBW3M4L5TLCq3Fc6oB0KHaC9A%2FQp3uwkB2Jby%2FdDo8%3D&reserved=0 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Echo-ing to what Mario said, I am also equally interested in knowing the >>>>> the surface devices are able to reach S2Idle. >>>>> >>>>> Spefically can you check if your tree has this commit? >>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.kernel.org%2Fpub%2Fscm%2Flinux%2Fkernel%2Fgit%2Fpdx86%2Fplatform-drivers-x86.git%2Fcommit%2F%3Fh%3Dfor-next%26id%3D9cfe02023cf67a36c2dfb05d1ea3eb79811a8720&data=04%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cb95422d699a2496a56f608d98a55e888%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637692923846585025%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=XdRCk8klBuDRCk7UWL%2Ft5wiupVVgdCWBqFmaYgGK%2BFU%3D&reserved=0 >>>>> >>>> >>>> My tree currently does not have that one. I've applied it. >>> >>> You should look through all the other amd-pmc patches that have happened >>> as well in linux-next, it's very likely some others will make sense too >>> for you to be using and testing with. >>> >>>> >>>>> this would tell the last s0i3 status, whether it was successful or not. >>>>> >>>>> cat /sys/kernel/debug/amd_pmc/smu_fw_info >>>> >>>> >>>> === SMU Statistics === >>>> Table Version: 3 >>>> Hint Count: 1 >>>> Last S0i3 Status: Success >>>> Time (in us) to S0i3: 102543 >>>> Time (in us) in S0i3: 10790466 >>>> >>>> === Active time (in us) === >>>> DISPLAY : 0 >>>> CPU : 39737 >>>> GFX : 0 >>>> VDD : 39732 >>>> ACP : 0 >>>> VCN : 0 >>>> DF : 18854 >>>> USB0 : 3790 >>>> USB1 : 2647 >>>> >>>>>> /sys/kernel/debug/amd_pmc/s0ix_stats >>>> >>>> After two seperate suspends: >>>> >>>> === S0ix statistics === >>>> S0ix Entry Time: 19022953504 >>>> S0ix Exit Time: 19485830941 >>>> Residency Time: 9643279 >>>> >>>> === S0ix statistics === >>>> S0ix Entry Time: 21091709805 >>>> S0ix Exit Time: 21586928064 >>>> Residency Time: 10317047 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Yeah these look good, thanks. >>> >>>>>> Does pinctrl-amd load on this system? It seems to me that the power >>>>>> button GPIO doesn't get used like normally on "regular" UEFI based AMD >>>>>> systems. I do see MSHW0040 so this is probably supported by >>>>>> surfacepro3-button and that will probably service all the important >>>>>> events. >>>> >>>> We require the first patch listed above to get pinctrl-amd to load on >>>> this >>>> system, and the two patches mentioned in 4 so we correctly choose >>>> soc-button-array which is used by all recent Surface devices. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> Sachi, >> >> I was talking to some internal folks about this patch. We had one more >> thought - can you please put into a Github gist (or somewhere >> semi-permanent) the output of: >> >> # cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/amdgpu_firmware_info >> >> That way we know more about the FW versions on your system in case of >> any future regressions stemming from this. >> >> Hans, >> >> If you can pick up the tag: >> >> Link: >> https://github.com/linux-surface/acpidumps/tree/master/surface_laptop_4_amd >> >> as well as that value for "Link: <url>" pointing to amdgpu_firmware_info >> in the commit message. Or if you want Sachi to re-spin to do >> themselves, then Sachi feel free to add my Reviewed-by tag in your v2. > > Hans, > > The requested amdgpu_firmware_info > Link: > https://gist.github.com/nakato/2a1a7df1a45fe680d7a08c583e1bf863 > > If you want me to re-spin with with the these two links and Mario's > Reviewed-by tag, let me know. There is no need to resend this, I've just merged it with the following tags added: Link: https://github.com/linux-surface/acpidumps/tree/master/surface_laptop_4_amd Link: https://gist.github.com/nakato/2a1a7df1a45fe680d7a08c583e1bf863 Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> Regards, Hans
