[PATCH v6 0/4] Support for Self Save API in OPAL
Gautham R Shenoy
ego at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Tue Apr 14 16:18:32 AEST 2020
Hello Pratik,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 12:39:13PM +0530, Pratik Rajesh Sampat wrote:
> v5:https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/skiboot/2020-March/016538.html
> Changelog
> v5 --> v6
> Updated background, motivation and illuminated potential design choices
>
> Background
> ==========
>
> The power management framework on POWER systems include core idle
> states that lose context. Deep idle states namely "winkle" on POWER8
> and "stop4" and "stop5" on POWER9 can be entered by a CPU to save
> different levels of power, as a consequence of which all the
> hypervisor resources such as SPRs and SCOMs are lost.
>
> For most SPRs, saving and restoration of content for SPRs and SCOMs
> is handled by the hypervisor kernel prior to entering an post exit
> from an idle state respectively. However, there is a small set of
> critical SPRs and XSCOMs that are expected to contain sane values even
> before the control is transferred to the hypervisor kernel at system
> reset vector.
>
> For this purpose, microcode firmware provides a mechanism to restore
> values on certain SPRs. The communication mechanism between the
> hypervisor kernel and the microcode is a standard interface called
> sleep-winkle-engine (SLW) on Power8 and Stop-API on Power9 which is
> abstracted by OPAL calls from the hypervisor kernel. The Stop-API
> provides an interface known as the self-restore API, to which the SPR
> number and a predefined value to be restored on wake-up from a deep
> stop state is supplied.
>
>
> Motivation to introduce a new Stop-API
> ======================================
>
> The self-restore API expects not just the SPR number but also the
> value with which the SPR is restored. This is good for those SPRs such
> as HSPRG0 whose values do not change at runtime, since for them, the
> kernel can invoke the self-restore API at boot time once the values of
> these SPRs are determined.
>
> However, there are use-cases where-in the value to be saved cannot be
> known or cannot be updated in the layer it currently is.
> The shortcomings and the new use-cases which cannot be served by the
> existing self-restore API, serves as motivation for a new API:
>
> Shortcoming1:
> ------------
> In a special wakeup scenario, SPRs such as PSSCR, whose values can
> change at runtime, are compelled to make the self-restore API call
> every time before entering a deep-idle state rendering it to be
> prohibitively expensive
To provide some more details, when a CPU in stop4/stop5 is woken up
due to a special-wakeup, once the task is done, the HCODE puts it back
to stop. To what stop level it is put back to, is dependent on the
PSSCR value that was passed to the HCODE via self-restore API. The
kernel currently provides the value of the deepest stop state (in
order to be more conservative). Thus if a core that was in stop4 was
woken up due to special wakeup, the HCODE would put it back to
stop5. This increases the subsequent wakeup latency by ~200us.
With the self-save feature, the HCODE will put it back to whatever the
PSSCR value was when the core went to a deep stop state after being
woken up by a special wakeup.
The description below gives a detailed overview of all the existing
shortcomings of self-restore API which is corrected by self-save.
--
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
>
> Shortcoming2:
> ------------
> The value of LPCR is dynamic based on if the CPU is entered a stop
> state during cpu idle versus cpu hotplug.
> Today, an additional self-restore call is made before entering
> CPU-Hotplug to clear the PECE1 bit in stop-API so that if we are
> woken up by a special wakeup on an offlined CPU, we go back to stop
> with the the bit cleared.
> There is a overhead of an extra call
>
> New Use-case:
> -------------
> In the case where the hypervisor is running on an
> ultravisor environment, the boot time is too late in the cycle to make
> the self-restore API calls, as these cannot be invoked from an
> non-secure context anymore
>
> To address these shortcomings, the firmware provides another API known
> as the self-save API. The self-save API only takes the SPR number as a
> parameter and will ensure that on wakeup from a deep-stop state the
> SPR is restored with the value that it contained prior to entering the
> deep-stop.
>
> Contrast between self-save and self-restore APIs
> ================================================
>
> Before entering
> deep idle |---------------|
> ------------> | HCODE A |
> | |---------------|
> |---------| |
> | CPU |----|
> |---------| |
> | |---------------|
> |------------>| HCODE B |
> On waking up |---------------|
> from deep idle
>
>
>
>
> When a self-restore API is invoked, the HCODE inserts instructions
> into "HCODE B" region of the above figure to restore the content of
> the SPR to the said value. The "HCODE B" region gets executed soon
> after the CPU wakes up from a deep idle state, thus executing the
> inserted instructions, thereby restoring the contents of the SPRs to
> the required values.
>
> When a self-save API is invoked, the HCODE inserts instructions into
> the "HCODE A" region of the above figure to save the content of the
> SPR into some location in memory. It also inserts instructions into
> the "HCODE B" region to restore the content of the SPR to the
> corresponding value saved in the memory by the instructions in "HCODE
> A" region.
>
> Thus, in contrast with self-restore, the self-save API *does not* need
> a value to be passed to it, since it ensures that the value of SPR
> before entering deep stop is saved, and subsequently the same value is
> restored.
>
> Self-save and self-restore are complementary features since,
> self-restore can help in restoring a different value in the SPR on
> wakeup from a deep-idle state than what it had before entering the
> deep idle state. This was used in POWER8 for HSPRG0 to distinguish a
> wakeup from Winkle vs Fastsleep.
>
> Limitations of self-save
> ========================
> Ideally all SPRs should be available for self-save, but HID0 is very
> tricky to implement in microcode due to various endianess quirks.
> Couple of implementation schemes were buggy and hence HID0 was left
> out to be self-restore only.
>
> The fallout of this limitation is as follows:
>
> * In Non PEF environment, no issue. Linux will use self-restore for
> HID0 as it does today and no functional impact.
>
> * In PEF environment, the HID0 restore value is decided by OPAL during
> boot and it is setup for LE hypervisor with radix MMU. This is the
> default and current working configuration of a PEF environment.
> However if there is a change, then HV Linux will try to change the
> HID0 value to something different than what OPAL decided, at which
> time deep-stop states will be disabled under this new PEF
> environment.
>
> A simple and workable design is achieved by scoping the power
> management deep-stop state support only to a known default PEF
> environment. Any deviation will affect *only* deep stop-state support
> (stop4,5) in that environment and not have any functional impediment
> to the environment itself.
>
> In future, if there is a need to support changing of HID0 to various
> values under PEF environment and support deep-stop states, it can be
> worked out via an ultravisor call or improve the microcode design to
> include HID0 in self-save. These future scheme would be an extension
> and does not break or make the current implementation scheme
> redundant.
>
> Design Choices
> ==============
>
> Presenting the design choices in front of us:
>
> Design-Choice 1:
> ----------------
> Only expose one of self-save or self-restore for all the SPRs. Prefer
> Self-save
>
> Pros:
> - Simplifies the design heavily, since the Kernel can unambiguously
> make one API call for all the SPRs on discovering the presence of
> the API type.
>
> Cons:
> - Breaks backward compatibility if OPAL always chooses to expose
> only the self-save API as the older kernels assume the existence
> of self-restore.
>
> - The set of SPRs supported by self-save and self-restore are not
> identical. Eg: HID0 is not supported by self-save API. PSSCR
> support via self-restore is not robust during special-wakeup.
>
> - As discussed above, self-save and self-restore are
> complementary. Thus OPAL apriory choosing one over the other for
> all SPRs takes away the flexibility from the kernel.
>
>
> Design-Choice 2:
> ----------------
> Expose two arrays of SPRs: One set of SPRs that are supported by
> self-save. Another set of SPRs supported by self-restore. These two
> sets do not intersect. Further, if an SPR is supported by both
> self-save and self-restore APIs, expose it only via self-save.
>
> Pros:
> - For an SPR the choice for the kernel is unambiguous.
>
> Cons:
> - Breaks backward compatibility if OPAL always chooses to expose
> the legacy SPRs only via the self-save API as the older kernels
> assume the existence of self-restore.
>
> - By making the decision early on, we take away the flexibility
> from the kernel to use an API of its choice for an SPR.
>
>
> Design-Choice 3
> ---------------
> Expose two arrays of SPRs. One set of SPRs that are supported by
> self-save API. Another set of SPRs supported by self-restore API. Let
> the kernel choose which API to invoke. Even if it wants to always
> prefer self-save over self-restore, let that be kernel's choice.
>
> Pros:
> - Keeps the design flexible to allow the kernel to take a
> decision based on its functional and performance requirements.
> Thus, the kernel for instance can make a choice to invoke
> self-restore API (when available) for SPRs whose values do not
> evolve at runtime, and invoke the self-save API (when
> available)
> for SPRs whose values will change during runtime.
>
> - Design is backward compatible with older kernels.
>
> Cons:
> - The Kernel code will have additional complexity for parsing two
> lists of SPRs and making a choice w.r.t invocation of a specific
> stop-api.
>
>
>
> Patches Organization
> ====================
> Design choice 3 has been chosen as an implementation to demonstrate in
> this patch series.
>
> Patch 1:
> Commit adds support calling into the self save firmware API.
> Also adds abstraction for making platform agnostic calls.
>
> Patch 2:
> Commit adds wrappers for the Self Save API for which an OPAL call can
> be made.
>
> Patch 3:
> Commit adds API to determine the version of the STOP API. This helps
> to identify support for self save in the firmware
>
> Patch 4:
> Commit adds device tree attributes to advertise self save and self
> restore functionality along with the register set as a bitmask
> currently supported in the firmware. It also uses the versioning API
> to determine support for the self-save feature as a whole.
>
> Pratik Rajesh Sampat (2):
> Self save API integration
> Advertise the self-save and self-restore attributes in the device tree
>
> Prem Shanker Jha (2):
> Self Save: Introducing Support for SPR Self Save
> API to verify the STOP API and image compatibility
>
> .../ibm,opal/power-mgt/self-restore.rst | 27 +
> .../ibm,opal/power-mgt/self-save.rst | 27 +
> doc/opal-api/opal-slw-self-save-reg-181.rst | 49 +
> doc/opal-api/opal-slw-set-reg-100.rst | 5 +
> doc/power-management.rst | 44 +
> hw/slw.c | 205 ++++
> include/opal-api.h | 3 +-
> include/p9_stop_api.H | 122 ++-
> include/skiboot.h | 4 +
> libpore/p9_cpu_reg_restore_instruction.H | 11 +-
> libpore/p9_hcd_memmap_base.H | 7 +
> libpore/p9_stop_api.C | 964 ++++++++++--------
> libpore/p9_stop_api.H | 141 ++-
> libpore/p9_stop_data_struct.H | 4 +-
> libpore/p9_stop_util.H | 27 +-
> 15 files changed, 1208 insertions(+), 432 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 doc/device-tree/ibm,opal/power-mgt/self-restore.rst
> create mode 100644 doc/device-tree/ibm,opal/power-mgt/self-save.rst
> create mode 100644 doc/opal-api/opal-slw-self-save-reg-181.rst
>
> --
> 2.24.1
>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list