All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa@intel.com>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
	"Syrjala, Ville" <ville.syrjala@intel.com>,
	rodrigo.vivi@intel.com,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2 3/3] drm/i915/rpl-s: Enable guc submission by default
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 11:57:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87czmso6l7.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211120002921.1939452-4-anusha.srivatsa@intel.com>

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021, Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa@intel.com> wrote:
> Though, RPL-S is defined as subplatform of ADL-S, unlike
> ADL-S, it has GuC submission by default.
>
> v2: Remove extra parenthesis (Jani)
>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Swathi Dhanavanthri <swathi.dhanavanthri@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> index 2fef3b0bbe95..6aa843a1c25f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ static void uc_expand_default_options(struct intel_uc *uc)
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Intermediate platforms are HuC authentication only */
> -	if (IS_ALDERLAKE_S(i915)) {
> +	if (IS_ALDERLAKE_S(i915) && !IS_RAPTORLAKE_S(i915)) {

I know I looked through the previous version, but I only realized this
now. The above just feels wrong. Like, if it's ADL-S it obviously can't
be RPL-S, so why the check.

We've had this type of thing before when IS_VALLEYVIEW() used to mean
VLV || CHV, and you'd have these really confusing checks:

	if (IS_VALLEYVIEW() && !IS_CHERRYVIEW())

We had to change that later on, and it was pretty annoying.

I'm really sorry I didn't spot this before, but I firmly believe adding
a platform check macro IS_RAPTORLAKE_S() as a subplatform check is the
wrong thing to do.

I think there are maybe three options:

1) Add RPL-S as a full blown platform of its own. Convert
   IS_ALDERLAKE_S() checks to IS_ALDERLAKE_S() || IS_RAPTORLAKE_S(). If
   we think there's going to be more differences than just the guc
   submission, this is the way to go.

2) Add RPL-S as a subplatform of ADL-S like here, but then don't add a
   platform macro IS_RAPTORLAKE_S(). Make the check something that
   conveys the subplatform idea. See all the users of IS_SUBPLATFORM()
   in i915_drv.h; for example IS_DG2_G10(). It's obvious it's a DG2 but
   subtype G10. So maybe IS_ADLS_RPLS(), I don't know.

3) Add RPL-S PCI IDs as ADL-S with separate device info, but add a
   feature flag for the guc submission default. Then RPL-S does not
   exist as a platform or subplatform in code, rather as ADL-S, but the
   difference is recorded via flags.


BR,
Jani.




>  		i915->params.enable_guc = ENABLE_GUC_LOAD_HUC;
>  		return;
>  	}

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center

  reply	other threads:[~2021-11-22  9:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-20  0:29 [Intel-gfx] [v2 0/3] Introduce Raptor Lake S Anusha Srivatsa
2021-11-20  0:29 ` [Intel-gfx] [v2 1/3] drm/i915/rpl-s: Add PCI IDS for " Anusha Srivatsa
2021-11-22 10:19   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-11-30 10:33     ` Srivatsa, Anusha
2021-11-20  0:29 ` [Intel-gfx] [v2 2/3] drm/i915/rpl-s: Add PCH Support " Anusha Srivatsa
2021-11-20  0:29 ` [Intel-gfx] [v2 3/3] drm/i915/rpl-s: Enable guc submission by default Anusha Srivatsa
2021-11-22  9:57   ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2021-11-30 11:09     ` Srivatsa, Anusha
2021-11-30 11:23       ` Jani Nikula
2021-11-20  1:12 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Introduce Raptor Lake S (rev2) Patchwork
2021-11-20  1:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2021-11-20  1:41 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-11-20  5:56 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87czmso6l7.fsf@intel.com \
    --to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=anusha.srivatsa@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ville.syrjala@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.