Re: [RFC 06/31] drm/i915: Convert i915_gem_init_swizzling to intel_gt

Tvrtko Ursulin
2019-06-14T16:21:42Z

On 14/06/2019 17:16, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 04:36:57PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 14/06/2019 16:25, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 04:17:06PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> Start using the newly introduced struct intel_gt to fuse together correct
>>>> logical init flow with uncore for more removal of implicit dev_priv in
>>>> mmio access.
>>>>
>>>> v2:
>>>> * Move code to i915_gem_fence_reg. (Chris)
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 4 +--
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 1 -
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 25 +--------------
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.h | 3 ++
>>>> 5 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
>>>> index 97155c5eb7e1..1df76f7c717e 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
>>>> @@ -2935,7 +2935,7 @@ static int intel_runtime_suspend(struct device *kdev)
>>>> intel_uc_resume(dev_priv);
>>>> - i915_gem_init_swizzling(dev_priv);
>>>> + intel_gt_init_swizzling(&dev_priv->gt);
>>>> i915_gem_restore_fences(dev_priv);
>>>> enable_rpm_wakeref_asserts(dev_priv);
>>>> @@ -3036,7 +3036,7 @@ static int intel_runtime_resume(struct device *kdev)
>>>> * No point of rolling back things in case of an error, as the best
>>>> * we can do is to hope that things will still work (and disable RPM).
>>>> */
>>>> - i915_gem_init_swizzling(dev_priv);
>>>> + intel_gt_init_swizzling(&dev_priv->gt);
>>>> i915_gem_restore_fences(dev_priv);
>>>> /*
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>> index e2c8813c9355..1eb203fdee60 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>> @@ -2586,7 +2586,6 @@ bool i915_gem_unset_wedged(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
>>>> void i915_gem_init_mmio(struct drm_i915_private *i915);
>>>> int __must_check i915_gem_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
>>>> int __must_check i915_gem_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
>>>> -void i915_gem_init_swizzling(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
>>>> void i915_gem_fini_hw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
>>>> void i915_gem_fini(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
>>>> int i915_gem_wait_for_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
>>>> index 7fdf252f9322..5c0db934315b 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
>>>> @@ -1205,29 +1205,6 @@ void i915_gem_sanitize(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>>>> mutex_unlock(&i915->drm.struct_mutex);
>>>> }
>>>> -void i915_gem_init_swizzling(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>>> -{
>>>> - if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 5 ||
>>>> - dev_priv->mm.bit_6_swizzle_x == I915_BIT_6_SWIZZLE_NONE)
>>>> - return;
>>>> -
>>>> - I915_WRITE(DISP_ARB_CTL, I915_READ(DISP_ARB_CTL) |
>>>> - DISP_TILE_SURFACE_SWIZZLING);
>>>> -
>>>> - if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 5))
>>>> - return;
>>>> -
>>>> - I915_WRITE(TILECTL, I915_READ(TILECTL) | TILECTL_SWZCTL);
>>>> - if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 6))
>>>> - I915_WRITE(ARB_MODE, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(ARB_MODE_SWIZZLE_SNB));
>>>> - else if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 7))
>>>> - I915_WRITE(ARB_MODE, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(ARB_MODE_SWIZZLE_IVB));
>>>> - else if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 8))
>>>> - I915_WRITE(GAMTARBMODE, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(ARB_MODE_SWIZZLE_BDW));
>>>> - else
>>>> - BUG();
>>>> -}
>>>> -
>>>> static void init_unused_ring(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, u32 base)
>>>> {
>>>> I915_WRITE(RING_CTL(base), 0);
>>>> @@ -1274,7 +1251,7 @@ int i915_gem_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>>> /* ...and determine whether they are sticking. */
>>>> intel_gt_verify_workarounds(dev_priv, "init");
>>>> - i915_gem_init_swizzling(dev_priv);
>>>> + intel_gt_init_swizzling(&dev_priv->gt);
>>>> /*
>>>> * At least 830 can leave some of the unused rings
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>>>> index 1c9466676caf..fc268599a0c3 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>>>> @@ -834,3 +834,40 @@ void i915_ggtt_init_fences(struct i915_ggtt *ggtt)
>>>> i915_gem_restore_fences(i915);
>>>> }
>>>> +
>>>> +void intel_gt_init_swizzling(struct intel_gt *gt)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct drm_i915_private *i915 = gt->i915;
>>>> + struct intel_uncore *uncore = gt->uncore;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (INTEL_GEN(i915) < 5 ||
>>>> + i915->mm.bit_6_swizzle_x == I915_BIT_6_SWIZZLE_NONE)
>>>> + return;
>>>> +
>>>> + intel_uncore_write(uncore,
>>>> + DISP_ARB_CTL,
>>>> + intel_uncore_read(uncore, DISP_ARB_CTL) |
>>>> + DISP_TILE_SURFACE_SWIZZLING);
>>>
>>> could we change this to intel_uncore_rmw ?
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> + if (IS_GEN(i915, 5))
>>>> + return;
>>>> +
>>>> + intel_uncore_write(uncore,
>>>> + TILECTL,
>>>> + intel_uncore_read(uncore, TILECTL) | TILECTL_SWZCTL);
>>>
>>> and here as well?
>>
>> Yes of course.. marking as TODO.
>
> ops, and I forgot to state that with that already add
>
> Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>

Thanks! I however planned to consolidate with rmw in a separate patch.
Just to keep different class of changes separate. Can I keep the r-b for
this patch as is in this case?

Regards,

Tvrtko