Re: [PATCH v5] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Implement platform_profile
From: Armin Wolf
Date: Sun May 12 2024 - 14:48:42 EST
Am 12.05.24 um 19:58 schrieb Limonciello, Mario:
On 5/12/2024 12:53 PM, Armin Wolf wrote:
Am 11.05.24 um 17:56 schrieb Shen, Yijun:
Internal Use - Confidential
-----Original Message-----
From: Limonciello, Mario <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2024 11:13 PM
To: Shen, Yijun <Yijun_Shen@xxxxxxxx>; Lyndon Sanche
<lsanche@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: pali@xxxxxxxxxx; W_Armin@xxxxxx;
srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
lkp@xxxxxxxxx; Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>; Matthew Garrett
<mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Heiner
Kallweit
<hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx>; Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@xxxxxxxxxx>;
platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
Dell Client
Kernel <Dell.Client.Kernel@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Implement
platform_profile
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
On 5/11/2024 10:05 AM, Shen, Yijun wrote:
Internal Use - Confidential
-----Original Message-----
From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2024 11:53 PM
To: Shen, Yijun <Yijun_Shen@xxxxxxxx>; Lyndon Sanche
<lsanche@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: pali@xxxxxxxxxx; W_Armin@xxxxxx;
srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
lkp@xxxxxxxxx; Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>; Matthew
Garrett
<mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Heiner
Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx>; Vegard Nossum
<vegard.nossum@xxxxxxxxxx>; platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Dell Client Kernel
<Dell.Client.Kernel@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: RE: [PATCH v5] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Implement
platform_profile
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
On 5/8/2024 09:24, Shen, Yijun wrote:
Hi Lyndon,
Thanks for working on this patch.
Dell side has an initial testing with this patch on some
laptops,
it looks
good. While changing the platform profile:
1. The corresponding USTT option in BIOS will be changed.
2. thermald will not be impacted. The related PSVT and ITMT will be
loaded.
Some Dell DTs does not have the USTT, Dell'll have a check if
nothing is
broken.
Hi Alex!
Have you had a check both on both your AMD laptops and workstations
too, or just the Intel ones? I think it would be good to make sure
it's getting the correct experience in both cases.
Hi Mario,
I've a check for this, for both laptop and workstation, the
dell_laptop
module will not be loaded. So, AMD platform will not be impacted by
this
patch series.
Follow is one example output with workstation.
#lsmod | grep dell
dell_wmi 28672 0
dell_smbios 32768 1 dell_wmi
dcdbas 20480 1 dell_smbios
dell_wmi_descriptor 20480 2 dell_wmi,dell_smbios
sparse_keymap 12288 1 dell_wmi
ledtrig_audio 12288 3
snd_ctl_led,snd_hda_codec_generic,dell_wmi
video 73728 2 dell_wmi,nvidia_modeset
wmi 40960 5
video,dell_wmi,wmi_bmof,dell_smbios,dell_wmi_descriptor
Ah; right that makes sense. In that case, is dell-laptop even the
right place for
this patch series? I would think the same policies for the
platform profile
should be able to apply to desktop/workstation.
The v6 of this series would block smbios-thermal-ctl from working on a
workstation too.
Additional, with this patch, follow behavior is found:
1. For example, the platform profile is quiet.
2. Reboot the system and change the USTT to performance.
3. Boot to desktop, the platform profile is "quiet", the USTT
will be
changed back to "quiet".
This looks like not a proper user experience. The platform
profile should
honor the BIOS setting, aka, the platform profile should be switched
to "performance".
I agree, this sounds like the initial profile needs to be read from
the BIOS settings too.
Furthermore I wanted to ask is there also a WMI setting that
corresponds to this that dell-wmi-sysman offers?
Yes, Mario, you're right. This thermal setting could also be
toggled by dell-
wmi-sysman.
But, for the Dell consumer AMD laptops, like Alienware, the BIOS
is another
variant which is different with the workstation one.
With this variant BIOS, there is no USTT and also no
dell_wmi/dell-wmi-
sysman.
I'm wondering if both should be probed in case the SMBIOS one goes
away one day.
Yep, I think this is a good suggestion.
Great! Although something I wonder is if the policy when changed
with dell-
wmi-sysman is immediate or requires a reboot. A lot of the
settings in there
aren't effective until after a reboot.
If this is one of them then it might not be a good idea to make it
work for
both.
Hi Mario,
Just have a check, the check steps are:
1. stop the thermald
2. run the stress test
3. Toggle the thermal setting between UltraPerformance and Quiet via
dell-wmi-sysman
4. Check the CPU FAN speed
The system reboot is not needed, the CPU fan speed changes
immediately.
A screen recorder here:
https://dell.box.com/s/p2bhd2b6cv8z5buk9eao3bosgrrp1lf9
Thanks
Hi,
i believe it should be the responsibility of the manufacturer (in
this case Dell) that
the thermal state remains consistent across both interfaces.
I think that the official Windows utility only checks the thermal
state reported by
the USTT interface, so we should match this behavior.
Thanks,
Armin Wolf
Why? Windows also does ACPI-WMI differently than Linux. It's not as
easy to check both from a Windows utility due to that.
Actually, it is quite easy to check both interfaces from a Windows utility Both ACPI-WMI objects can be accessed by
Windows applications, the utility just has to interact with an additional WMI object, but they decided to not do it.
Also the original smbios-thermal-ctl utility was created by Dell itself (i think?), so they likely would have implemented this
if it really was necessary.
As Dell likely only tests their machines with Windows (if at all), i propose that we try to match the Windows behavior.
Thanks,
Armin Wolf