[Public]
Hi Guenter
-----Original Message-----
From: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@xxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck
Sent: Wednesday, July 7, 2021 7:52 PM
To: Chatradhi, Naveen Krishna <NaveenKrishna.Chatradhi@xxxxxxx>; linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Gupta, Akshay <Akshay.Gupta@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] hwmon: sbrmi: Add support for sbrmi power module
[CAUTION: External Email]
On 7/7/21 7:14 AM, Chatradhi, Naveen Krishna wrote:
> [Public]
>
> Hi Guenter,
>
> Couple of questions inline before we submit the next version. Could you answer them.
[naveenk:] Yes, that was the one. Submitting the next version. Thank you.
>
> Regards,
> Naveenk
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chatradhi, Naveen Krishna <NaveenKrishna.Chatradhi@xxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2021 8:36 PM
> To: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Gupta, Akshay <Akshay.Gupta@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] hwmon: sbrmi: Add support for sbrmi power
> module
>
> [CAUTION: External Email]
>
> [AMD Official Use Only]
>
> Hi Guenter,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@xxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2021 8:29 PM
> To: Chatradhi, Naveen Krishna <NaveenKrishna.Chatradhi@xxxxxxx>;
> linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Gupta, Akshay <Akshay.Gupta@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] hwmon: sbrmi: Add support for sbrmi power
> module
>
> [CAUTION: External Email]
>
> On 6/25/21 6:25 AM, Naveen Krishna Chatradhi wrote:
>> From: Akshay Gupta <Akshay.Gupta@xxxxxxx>
>>
>> On AMD platforms the Out-of-band access is provided by Advanced
>> Platform Management
>
> This is a bit too long for checkpatch.
> [naveenk:] Sure
>
>> Link (APML), APML is a SMBus v2.0 compatible 2-wire processor client interface.
>> APML is also referred as the sideband interface (SBI).
>>
>> APML is used to communicate with the Remote Management Interface
>> (SB-Remote Management Interface (SB-RMI) which provides Soft Mailbox
>> messages to report power consumption and power limits of the CPU socket.
>>
>> - This module add support to read power consumption,
>> power limit & max power limit and write power limit.
>> - To instantiate this driver on an AMD CPU with SB-RMI support,
>> the i2c bus number would be the bus connected from the board
>> management controller (BMC) to the CPU.
>>
>
> This is a bit vague. Would this driver be instantiated on the host CPU or on the BMC ?
> [naveenk:] This driver is to be instantiated on a BMC connected to AMD CPU. Will correct the comment.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Akshay Gupta <Akshay.Gupta@xxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <nchatrad@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/hwmon/Kconfig | 10 ++
>> drivers/hwmon/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/hwmon/sbrmi.c | 394 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 3 files changed, 405 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 drivers/hwmon/sbrmi.c
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig b/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig index
>> 87624902ea80..d1813ea8382c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
>> @@ -1551,6 +1551,16 @@ config SENSORS_SBTSI
>> This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module will
>> be called sbtsi_temp.
>>
>> +config SENSORS_SBRMI
>> + tristate "Emulated SB-RMI sensor"
>> + depends on I2C
>> + help
>> + If you say yes here you get support for emulated RMI
>> + sensors on AMD SoCs with APML interface connected to a BMC device.
>> +
>> + This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module will
>> + be called sbrmi.
>> +
>> config SENSORS_SHT15
>> tristate "Sensiron humidity and temperature sensors. SHT15 and compat."
>> depends on GPIOLIB || COMPILE_TEST diff --git
>> a/drivers/hwmon/Makefile b/drivers/hwmon/Makefile index
>> 59e78bc212cf..8031acf58936 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hwmon/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/Makefile
>> @@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_PWM_FAN) += pwm-fan.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_RASPBERRYPI_HWMON) += raspberrypi-hwmon.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_S3C) += s3c-hwmon.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_SBTSI) += sbtsi_temp.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_SBRMI) += sbrmi.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_SCH56XX_COMMON)+= sch56xx-common.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_SCH5627) += sch5627.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SENSORS_SCH5636) += sch5636.o
>> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/sbrmi.c b/drivers/hwmon/sbrmi.c new file
>> mode 100644 index 000000000000..c35829513459
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/sbrmi.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,394 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
>> +/*
>> + * sbrmi.c - hwmon driver for a SB-RMI mailbox
>> + * compliant AMD SoC device.
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (C) 2020-2021 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
>> + */
>> +
>> +#include <linux/err.h>
>> +#include <linux/hwmon.h>
>> +#include <linux/i2c.h>
>> +#include <linux/init.h>
>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>> +#include <linux/mutex.h>
>> +#include <linux/of.h>
>> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>
> I don't immediately see why this include is needed.
>
>> +#include <asm-generic/ioctl.h>
>
> This looks wrong, and I don't immediately see why it would be needed.
>
>> +#include <linux/delay.h>
>
> Alphabetic include file order, please.
> [naveenk:] Sure
>> +
>> +/* Do not allow setting negative power limit */ #define
>> +SBRMI_PWR_MIN
>> +0
>> +/* Mask for Status Register bit[1] */ #define SW_ALERT_MASK 0x2
>> +
>
> Please always use
>
> #define<space>DEFINITION<tab>value
> ^^^^^
>
>> +/* Software Interrupt for triggering */
>> +#define START_CMD 0x80
>> +#define TRIGGER_MAILBOX 0x01
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * SB-RMI supports soft mailbox service request to MP1 (power
>> +management
>> + * firmware) through SBRMI inbound/outbound message registers.
>> + * SB-RMI message IDs
>> + */
>> +enum sbrmi_msg_id {
>> + SBRMI_READ_PKG_PWR_CONSUMPTION = 0x1,
>> + SBRMI_WRITE_PKG_PWR_LIMIT,
>> + SBRMI_READ_PKG_PWR_LIMIT,
>> + SBRMI_READ_PKG_MAX_PWR_LIMIT,
>> +};
>> +
>> +/* SB-RMI registers */
>> +enum sbrmi_reg {
>> + SBRMI_CTRL = 0x01,
>> + SBRMI_STATUS,
>> + SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG0 = 0x30,
>> + SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG1,
>> + SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG2,
>> + SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG3,
>> + SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG4,
>> + SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG5,
>> + SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG6,
>> + SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG7,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG0,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG1,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG2,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG3,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG4,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG5,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG6,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG7,
>> + SBRMI_SW_INTERRUPT,
>> +};
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Each client has this additional data */
>
> Please be consistent with comments: This does not really need to be a multi-line comment. While that does not really matter, you use a single-line comment to describe the next structure. Please make it both either single-line or multi-line.
>
>> +struct sbrmi_data {
>> + struct i2c_client *client;
>> + struct mutex lock;
>> +};
>> +
>> +/* Mailbox message data format */
>> +union mailbox_word {
>> + u8 bytes[4];
>> + u32 value;
>
> That strongly suggests that the driver will only work on either little-endian or big-endian systems, depending on the byte order of transfers. Please restrict it accordingly.
>
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct sbrmi_mailbox_msg {
>> + u8 cmd;
>> + bool read;
>> + union mailbox_word data_in;
>> + union mailbox_word data_out;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static int print_mailbox_error(struct sbrmi_data *data) {
>
> Nit> Many functions only use data>client and, in some cases,
> Nit> dereference it
> several times. It might be easier to just pass 'client'.
> [naveenk:] Sure
>
>> + int status;
>> +
>> + /* Mailbox error code will be written by Firmware in
>> + * SBRMI::OutBndMsg_inst7 (SBRMI_x37)
>> + */
>
> /*
> * Please use standard multi-line comments. Applies to entire driver.
> */
> [naveenk:] Sure
>
>> + status = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(data->client, SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG7);
>> + if (status < 0) {
>> + pr_err("SMBUS translation failed\n");
>> + return status;
>> + }
>> +
>> + switch (status) {
>> + case 0x0: /* Success */
>> + break;
>> + case 0x1:
>> + pr_err("Mailbox message command is aborted\n");
>> + break;
>> + case 0x2:
>> + pr_err("Unknown mailbox message\n");
>> + break;
>> + case 0x3:
>> + pr_err("Invalid core is specified in mailbox message parameters\n");
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + pr_err("Unknown Error\n");
>> + }
>
> Is this noise necessary ? I am concerned that, if it occurs, it would be persistent and fill up the kernel log with noise.
> [naveenk:] These are firmware defined error codes, can we change them to pr_debug and keep them ?
>
pr_debug is ok, but ...
>> +
>> + return status;
>
> Error codes are supposed to be negative and standard Linux error codes.
> Please convert the above errors to standard Linux error codes.
>
you'll still need to convert the error codes to standard error codes.
This is the only question I found. Please let me know if I missed something.
Thanks,
Guenter
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int sbrmi_enable_alert(struct sbrmi_data *data) {
>> + int ctrl;
>> +
>> + /* Enable the SB-RMI Software alert status
>> + * by writing 0 to bit 4 of Control register(0x1)
>> + */
>> + ctrl = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(data->client, SBRMI_CTRL);
>> + if (ctrl < 0)
>> + return ctrl;
>> +
>> + if (ctrl & 0x10) {
>> + ctrl &= ~0x10;
>> + return i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client,
>> + SBRMI_CTRL, ctrl);
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int rmi_mailbox_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data,
>> + struct sbrmi_mailbox_msg *msg) {
>> + union mailbox_word output, input;
>> + int i, err = 0, retry = 10;
>
> Initializing 'err' is unnecessary.
>
>> + int sw_status;
>> +
>> + mutex_lock(&data->lock);
>> +
>> + err = sbrmi_enable_alert(data);
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + goto exit_unlock;
>> +
>> + /* Indicate firmware a command is to be serviced */
>> + err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG7, START_CMD);
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + goto exit_unlock;
>> +
>> + /* Write the command to SBRMI::InBndMsg_inst0 */
>> + err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client,
>> + SBRMI_INBNDMSG0, msg->cmd);
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + goto exit_mod;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * For both read and write the initiator (BMC) writes
>> + * Command Data In[31:0] to SBRMI::InBndMsg_inst[4:1]
>> + * SBRMI_x3C(MSB):SBRMI_x39(LSB)
>> + */
>> + input = msg->data_in;
>> + for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
>
> This writes 3 bytes. Is that on purpose ? If so please explain since the above suggests that 4 bytes should be written.
> [naveenk:] this was a mistake, it has to be 4.
>
>> + err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client,
>> + (SBRMI_INBNDMSG1 + i),
>
> Unnecessary ( )
>
>> + input.bytes[i]);
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + goto exit_mod;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Write 0x01 to SBRMI::SoftwareInterrupt to notify firmware to
>> + * perform the requested read or write command
>> + */
>> + err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client,
>> + SBRMI_SW_INTERRUPT, TRIGGER_MAILBOX);
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + goto exit_mod;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Firmware will write SBRMI::Status[SwAlertSts]=1 to generate
>> + * an ALERT (if enabled) to initiator (BMC) to indicate completion
>> + * of the requested command
>> + */
>> + do {
>> + sw_status = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(data->client,
>> + SBRMI_STATUS);
>> + if (sw_status < 0) {
>> + err = sw_status;
>> + goto exit_mod;
>> + }
>> + if (sw_status & SW_ALERT_MASK)
>> + break;
>> + usleep_range(50, 100);
>> + } while (retry--);
>> +
>> + if (retry < 0) {
>> + pr_err("Firmware fail to indicate command
>> + colmpletion\n");
>
> completion
>
>> + err = -1;
>> + goto exit_mod;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * For a read operation, the initiator (BMC) reads the firmware response
>> + * Command Data Out[31:0] from SBRMI::OutBndMsg_inst[4:1]
>> + * {SBRMI_x34(MSB):SBRMI_x31(LSB)}.
>> + */
>> + if (msg->read) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
>> + output.bytes[i] =
>> + i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(data->client,
>> +
>> + (SBRMI_OUTBNDMSG1 + i));
>
> Unnecessary ().
>
>> + if (output.bytes[i] < 0) {
>
> output.bytes is defined as u8. This will not catch errors.
>
>> + err = output.bytes[i];
>> + goto exit_mod;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + }
>> + msg->data_out = output;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * BMC must write 1'b1 to SBRMI::Status[SwAlertSts] to clear the
>> + * ALERT to initiator
>> + */
>> + err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, SBRMI_STATUS,
>> + (sw_status | SW_ALERT_MASK));
>
> Unnecessary ().
>
>> +
>> +exit_mod:
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + pr_err("SMBUS translation failed\n");
>> + else
>> + err = print_mailbox_error(data);
>> +exit_unlock:
>> + mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
>> + return err;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int sbrmi_read(struct device *dev, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
>> + u32 attr, int channel, long *val) {
>> + struct sbrmi_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + struct sbrmi_mailbox_msg msg = { 0 };
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + if (type != hwmon_power)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + msg.read = true;
>> + switch (attr) {
>> + case hwmon_power_input:
>> + msg.cmd = SBRMI_READ_PKG_PWR_CONSUMPTION;
>> + ret = rmi_mailbox_xfer(data, &msg);
>> + break;
>> + case hwmon_power_cap:
>> + msg.cmd = SBRMI_READ_PKG_PWR_LIMIT;
>> + ret = rmi_mailbox_xfer(data, &msg);
>> + break;
>> + case hwmon_power_cap_max:
>> + msg.cmd = SBRMI_READ_PKG_MAX_PWR_LIMIT;
>> + ret = rmi_mailbox_xfer(data, &msg);
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> + /*
>> + * hwmon power attributes are in microWatt
>> + */
>> + *val = (long)msg.data_out.value * 1000;
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int sbrmi_write(struct device *dev, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
>> + u32 attr, int channel, long val) {
>> + struct sbrmi_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + struct sbrmi_mailbox_msg msg = { 0 };
>> +
>> + if (type != hwmon_power && attr != hwmon_power_cap)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + /*
>> + * hwmon power attributes are in microWatt
>> + * mailbox read/write is in mWatt
>> + */
>> + val /= 1000;
>> +
>> + msg.cmd = SBRMI_READ_PKG_MAX_PWR_LIMIT;
>> + msg.data_in.value = 0;
>> + msg.read = true;
>> + rmi_mailbox_xfer(data, &msg);
>> +
>> + val = clamp_val(val, SBRMI_PWR_MIN, msg.data_out.value);
>> +
>> + msg.cmd = SBRMI_WRITE_PKG_PWR_LIMIT;
>> + msg.data_in.value = val;
>> + msg.read = false;
>> +
>> + return rmi_mailbox_xfer(data, &msg); }
>> +
>> +static umode_t sbrmi_is_visible(const void *data,
>> + enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
>> + u32 attr, int channel) {
>> + switch (type) {
>> + case hwmon_power:
>> + switch (attr) {
>> + case hwmon_power_input:
>> + case hwmon_power_cap_max:
>> + return 0444;
>> + case hwmon_power_cap:
>> + return 0644;
>> + }
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct hwmon_channel_info *sbrmi_info[] = {
>> + HWMON_CHANNEL_INFO(power,
>> + HWMON_P_INPUT | HWMON_P_CAP | HWMON_P_CAP_MAX),
>> + NULL
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct hwmon_ops sbrmi_hwmon_ops = {
>> + .is_visible = sbrmi_is_visible,
>> + .read = sbrmi_read,
>> + .write = sbrmi_write,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct hwmon_chip_info sbrmi_chip_info = {
>> + .ops = &sbrmi_hwmon_ops,
>> + .info = sbrmi_info,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static int sbrmi_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>> + const struct i2c_device_id *id) {
>> + struct device *dev = &client->dev;
>> + struct device *hwmon_dev;
>> + struct sbrmi_data *data;
>> +
>> + if (!i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter, I2C_FUNC_I2C)) {
>> + dev_err(&client->dev, "adapter does not support true
>> + I2C\n");
>
> Why would that matter? It only uses SMBus functions.
> [naveenk:] yes, will remove this.
>
>> + return -ENODEV;
>> + }
>> +
>> + data = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct sbrmi_data), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!data)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + data->client = client;
>> + mutex_init(&data->lock);
>> +
>> + hwmon_dev = devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(dev,
>> + client->name, data,
>> +
>> + &sbrmi_chip_info, NULL);
>> +
>> + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(hwmon_dev); }
>> +
>> +static const struct i2c_device_id sbrmi_id[] = {
>> + {"sbrmi", 0},
>> + {}
>> +};
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, sbrmi_id);
>> +
>> +static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused sbrmi_of_match[] = {
>> + {
>> + .compatible = "amd,sbrmi",
>> + },
>> + { },
>> +};
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sbrmi_of_match);
>> +
>> +static struct i2c_driver sbrmi_driver = {
>> + .class = I2C_CLASS_HWMON,
>> + .driver = {
>> + .name = "sbrmi",
>> + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(sbrmi_of_match),
>> + },
>> + .probe = sbrmi_probe,
>> + .id_table = sbrmi_id,
>> +};
>> +
>> +module_i2c_driver(sbrmi_driver);
>> +
>> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Akshay Gupta <akshay.gupta@xxxxxxx>");
>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Hwmon driver for AMD SB-RMI emulated sensor");
>> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> [naveenk:] Thank you for your comments, we will address your comments and submit v2 soon.
>>
> [naveenk:]
> Regards,
> Naveenk
>
