public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Gordon <david.s.gordon@intel.com>
To: Yu Dai <yu.dai@intel.com>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] drm/i915/guc: (re)initialise doorbell h/w when enabling GuC submission
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 20:46:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <570EA232.4080608@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <570E86DF.2050909@intel.com>

On 13/04/16 18:50, Yu Dai wrote:
>
>
> On 04/07/2016 10:21 AM, Dave Gordon wrote:
>> During a hibernate/resume cycle, the whole system is reset, including
>> the GuC and the doorbell hardware. Then the system is booted up, drivers
>> are loaded, etc -- the GuC firmware may be loaded and set running at this
>> point. But then, the booted kernel is replaced by the hibernated image,
>> and this resumed kernel will also try to reload the GuC firmware (which
>> will fail). To recover, we reset the GuC and try again (which should
>> work). But this GuC reset doesn't also reset the doorbell hardware, so
>> it can be left in a state inconsistent with that assumed by the driver
>> and the GuC.
>>
>> It would be better if the GuC reset also cleared all doorbell state,
>> but that's not how the hardware currently works; also, the driver cannot
>> directly reprogram the doorbell hardware (only the GuC can do that).
>>
>> So this patch cycles through all doorbells, assigning and releasing each
>> in turn, so that all the doorbell hardware is left in a consistent state,
>> no matter how it was programmed by the previously-running kernel and/or
>> GuC firmware.
>>
>> This patch can be removed if/when the GuC firmware is updated so that it
>> (re)initialises the doorbell hardware after every firmware (re)load.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dave Gordon <david.s.gordon@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c | 46
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
>> index 2fc69f1..f466eab 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
>> @@ -707,6 +707,50 @@ static void guc_client_free(struct drm_device *dev,
>>       kfree(client);
>>   }
>> +/*
>> + * Borrow the first client to set up & tear down every doorbell
>> + * in turn, to ensure that all doorbell h/w is (re)initialised.
>> + */
>> +static void guc_init_doorbell_hw(struct intel_guc *guc)
>> +{
>> +    struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
>> +    struct i915_guc_client *client = guc->execbuf_client;
>> +    struct guc_doorbell_info *doorbell;
>> +    uint16_t db_id, i;
>> +    void *base;
>> +    int ret;
>> +
>> +    base = kmap_atomic(i915_gem_object_get_page(client->client_obj, 0));
>> +    doorbell = base + client->doorbell_offset;
>> +    db_id = client->doorbell_id;
>> +
>> +    for (i = 0; i < GUC_MAX_DOORBELLS; ++i) {
>> +        i915_reg_t drbreg = GEN8_DRBREGL(i);
>> +        u32 value = I915_READ(drbreg);
>> +
>> +        ret = guc_update_doorbell_id(client, doorbell, i);
>> +
>> +        if (((value & GUC_DOORBELL_ENABLED) && (i != db_id)) || ret)
>> +            DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Doorbell reg 0x%x was 0x%x, ret %d\n",
>> +                drbreg.reg, value, ret);
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    /* Restore to original value */
>> +    guc_update_doorbell_id(client, doorbell, db_id);
>> +
>> +    for (i = 0; i < GUC_MAX_DOORBELLS; ++i) {
>> +        i915_reg_t drbreg = GEN8_DRBREGL(i);
>> +        u32 value = I915_READ(drbreg);
>> +
>> +        if ((value & GUC_DOORBELL_ENABLED) && (i != db_id))
>> +            DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Doorbell reg 0x%x finally 0x%x\n",
>> +                        drbreg.reg, value);
>> +
>> +    }
>> +
>
> The for loop above is not needed. It can be merged into previous loop by
> print out new drbreg value (read it again after update_doorbell_id).
>
> At this point, only need to check if db_id is correctly enabled or not
> by print out I915_READ(GEN8_DRBREGL(db_id)).
>
> Alex

No, the idea is not to check that the GuC call has *enabled* each 
selected doorbell, but to check that after the end of the first loop, 
and the subsequent restore, all *other* doorbells have been *disabled*. 
We're only *selecting* each doorbell so that we can then *deselect* it 
as a side effect of selecting the next one!

Hence separate loop required ...

.Dave.

>> +    kunmap_atomic(base);
>> +}
>> +
>>   /**
>>    * guc_client_alloc() - Allocate an i915_guc_client
>>    * @dev:    drm device
>> @@ -971,8 +1015,8 @@ int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct drm_device
>> *dev)
>>       }
>>       guc->execbuf_client = client;
>> -
>>       host2guc_sample_forcewake(guc, client);
>> +    guc_init_doorbell_hw(guc);
>>       return 0;
>>   }
>

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-13 19:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-07 17:21 [PATCH v4 0/6] Fixes and workarounds for GuC/doorbell setup Dave Gordon
2016-04-07 17:21 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] drm/i915/guc: add doorbell map to debugfs/i915_guc_info Dave Gordon
2016-04-13 17:51   ` Yu Dai
2016-04-07 17:21 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] drm/i915/guc: move guc_ring_doorbell() nearer to callsite Dave Gordon
2016-04-13 17:52   ` Yu Dai
2016-04-07 17:21 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] drm/i915/guc: refactor doorbell management code Dave Gordon
2016-04-07 21:26   ` Yu Dai
2016-04-12  7:30     ` Dave Gordon
2016-04-07 17:21 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] drm/i915/guc: (re)initialise doorbell h/w when enabling GuC submission Dave Gordon
2016-04-13 17:50   ` Yu Dai
2016-04-13 19:46     ` Dave Gordon [this message]
2016-04-13 20:13       ` Yu Dai
2016-04-20 15:19         ` Dave Gordon
2016-04-07 17:21 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] drm/i915/guc: disable GuC submission earlier during GuC (re)load Dave Gordon
2016-04-13 17:51   ` Yu Dai
2016-04-07 17:21 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] DO NOT MERGE: add enable_guc_loading parameter Dave Gordon
2016-04-08  7:59 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for Fixes and workarounds for GuC/doorbell setup Patchwork
2016-04-20 15:28   ` Dave Gordon

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=570EA232.4080608@intel.com \
    --to=david.s.gordon@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=yu.dai@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox