From: Balasubramani Vivekanandan <balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
To: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>,
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 5/5] drm/i915/mtl: Hold forcewake and MCR lock over PPAT setup
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 21:21:07 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4d76483JRj5d4RL@bala-ubuntu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221128233014.4000136-6-matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
On 28.11.2022 15:30, Matt Roper wrote:
> PPAT setup involves a series of multicast writes. This can be optimized
> slightly be acquiring forcewake and the steering lock just once for the
> entire sequence.
>
> Suggested-by: Balasubramani Vivekanandan <balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
> index 2ba3983984b9..288d9f118ee9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
> @@ -482,14 +482,25 @@ static void tgl_setup_private_ppat(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
>
> static void xehp_setup_private_ppat(struct intel_gt *gt)
> {
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(0), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(1), GEN8_PPAT_WC);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(2), GEN8_PPAT_WT);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(3), GEN8_PPAT_UC);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(4), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(5), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(6), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(7), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + enum forcewake_domains fw;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + fw = intel_uncore_forcewake_for_reg(gt->uncore, _MMIO(XEHP_PAT_INDEX(0).reg),
> + FW_REG_READ);
I am not completely aware of forcewake implementation. I am wondering if
the last parameter should be FW_REG_WRITE since it is register write
which is happening later.
Regards,
Bala
> + intel_uncore_forcewake_get(gt->uncore, fw);
> +
> + intel_gt_mcr_lock(gt, &flags);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(0), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(1), GEN8_PPAT_WC);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(2), GEN8_PPAT_WT);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(3), GEN8_PPAT_UC);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(4), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(5), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(6), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(7), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_unlock(gt, flags);
> +
> + intel_uncore_forcewake_put(gt->uncore, fw);
> }
>
> static void icl_setup_private_ppat(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
> --
> 2.38.1
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Balasubramani Vivekanandan <balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
To: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>,
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] drm/i915/mtl: Hold forcewake and MCR lock over PPAT setup
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 21:21:07 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4d76483JRj5d4RL@bala-ubuntu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221128233014.4000136-6-matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
On 28.11.2022 15:30, Matt Roper wrote:
> PPAT setup involves a series of multicast writes. This can be optimized
> slightly be acquiring forcewake and the steering lock just once for the
> entire sequence.
>
> Suggested-by: Balasubramani Vivekanandan <balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
> index 2ba3983984b9..288d9f118ee9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
> @@ -482,14 +482,25 @@ static void tgl_setup_private_ppat(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
>
> static void xehp_setup_private_ppat(struct intel_gt *gt)
> {
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(0), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(1), GEN8_PPAT_WC);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(2), GEN8_PPAT_WT);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(3), GEN8_PPAT_UC);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(4), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(5), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(6), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> - intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(7), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + enum forcewake_domains fw;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + fw = intel_uncore_forcewake_for_reg(gt->uncore, _MMIO(XEHP_PAT_INDEX(0).reg),
> + FW_REG_READ);
I am not completely aware of forcewake implementation. I am wondering if
the last parameter should be FW_REG_WRITE since it is register write
which is happening later.
Regards,
Bala
> + intel_uncore_forcewake_get(gt->uncore, fw);
> +
> + intel_gt_mcr_lock(gt, &flags);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(0), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(1), GEN8_PPAT_WC);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(2), GEN8_PPAT_WT);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(3), GEN8_PPAT_UC);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(4), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(5), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(6), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_multicast_write_fw(gt, XEHP_PAT_INDEX(7), GEN8_PPAT_WB);
> + intel_gt_mcr_unlock(gt, flags);
> +
> + intel_uncore_forcewake_put(gt->uncore, fw);
> }
>
> static void icl_setup_private_ppat(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
> --
> 2.38.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-30 15:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-28 23:30 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 0/5] i915: dedicated MCR locking and hardware semaphore Matt Roper
2022-11-28 23:30 ` Matt Roper
2022-11-28 23:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 1/5] drm/i915/gt: Correct kerneldoc for intel_gt_mcr_wait_for_reg() Matt Roper
2022-11-28 23:30 ` Matt Roper
2022-11-30 15:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-11-30 15:42 ` Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-11-28 23:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 2/5] drm/i915/gt: Pass gt rather than uncore to lowest-level reads/writes Matt Roper
2022-11-28 23:30 ` Matt Roper
2022-11-30 15:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-11-30 15:43 ` Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-11-28 23:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 3/5] drm/i915/gt: Add dedicated MCR lock Matt Roper
2022-11-28 23:30 ` Matt Roper
2022-11-30 15:45 ` [Intel-gfx] " Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-11-30 15:45 ` Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-11-28 23:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 4/5] drm/i915/mtl: Add hardware-level lock for steering Matt Roper
2022-11-28 23:30 ` Matt Roper
2022-12-02 14:46 ` [Intel-gfx] " Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-12-05 8:58 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-12-05 15:52 ` Matt Roper
2022-12-05 18:16 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-11-28 23:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 5/5] drm/i915/mtl: Hold forcewake and MCR lock over PPAT setup Matt Roper
2022-11-28 23:30 ` Matt Roper
2022-11-30 15:51 ` Balasubramani Vivekanandan [this message]
2022-11-30 15:51 ` Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-11-30 15:58 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 " Matt Roper
2022-11-30 15:58 ` Matt Roper
2022-12-01 9:26 ` [Intel-gfx] " Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-12-01 9:26 ` Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2022-12-01 21:01 ` [Intel-gfx] " Matt Roper
2022-12-01 21:01 ` Matt Roper
2022-11-30 16:05 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 " Matt Roper
2022-11-30 16:05 ` Matt Roper
2022-11-29 0:01 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for i915: dedicated MCR locking and hardware semaphore (rev2) Patchwork
2022-11-29 0:20 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2022-11-29 6:15 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2022-11-30 17:13 ` Matt Roper
2022-11-30 16:24 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for i915: dedicated MCR locking and hardware semaphore (rev3) Patchwork
2022-11-30 16:46 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2022-11-30 22:40 ` Matt Roper
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=Y4d76483JRj5d4RL@bala-ubuntu \
--to=balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@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.