Hi Song,
On 2/15/2022 11:51 PM, Song Liu wrote:
[CAUTION: External Email]
Hi Naveen Krishna,
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 9:24 AM Nathan Fontenot <nafonten@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2/14/22 11:21, Song Liu wrote:
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 7:32 AM Chatradhi, Naveen Krishna
<nchatrad@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Song,
On 2/11/2022 3:10 AM, Song Liu wrote:
[...]
HSMP mailbox messages are evolving and each platform defines a supported
list of messages.
On a given platform these messages are described in the PPR.
Eg: Milan PPR has "7 Host System Management Port (HSMP)", is made public
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amd.com%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2FTechDocs%2F55898_B1_pub_0.50.zip&data=04%7C01%7CNaveenKrishna.Chatradhi%40amd.com%7C97254107b02b4ae0c30308d9f0b004d4%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637805461640162776%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=SLrynPAkyTvYswBnj%2BK%2Ff3ELedFn5iOJ6xZtgGcC5XM%3D&reserved=0
Bringing detailed description of these messages from PPR into the kernel
would be a
duplicating effort. Which will also bring in challenges such as
maintaining the details
for every supported platform and submitting kernel patches for every
platform.
We would like to avoid bringing more details of these messages to the
kernel documentation.
Such a structure can be described as part of esmi_oob_library to ease
user space tool development.
I agree there is extra effort to adding extra logic and documentations to
the kernel. How about we ship current version with a few minor changes:
1). msg_desc_table is in the header, so please prefix it with hsmp_
2) as Nathan suggested, add more comments to msg_desc_table. Maybe
something like:
/*
* HSMP_GET_FCLK_MCLK,
* output arg0 = fclk (MHz); arg1 = mclk (MHz)
*/
Agreed, this is the type of update I was thinking of.
-Nathan
{0, 2, GET},
Besides these, I have a question. Per the hardware design, args and
reponse in hsmp_message share the same registers. Shall we make
them in/out argments in hsmp_message and save 256 bytes per
hsmp_message?
Do these make sense to you? We are hoping to back port these changes
to unblock our tests. But we need them to be applied to pdx86 first.
Agreed on using one of buf array for both arguments and response data. I've
submitted the next version with these comments addressed.
Thanks,
Song
