From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: "Souza, Jose" <jose.souza@intel.com>,
"Harrison, John C" <john.c.harrison@intel.com>,
"joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com"
<joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"Balasubrawmanian, Vivaik" <vivaik.balasubrawmanian@intel.com>
Cc: "Ursulin, Tvrtko" <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>,
"Nikula, Jani" <jani.nikula@intel.com>,
"kenneth@whitecape.org" <kenneth@whitecape.org>,
"Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
"Zanoni, Paulo R" <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>,
"Ghuge, Sagar" <sagar.ghuge@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] drm/i915: Add GETPARAM for GuC submission version
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 08:44:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5a190ddc-5739-4b39-86e4-afaef7b76244@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ebc1d9a29f2fd91f371393be07e95a76b63ae47b.camel@intel.com>
On 06/02/2024 20:51, Souza, Jose wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-02-06 at 12:42 -0800, John Harrison wrote:
>> On 2/6/2024 08:33, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>> On 01/02/2024 18:25, Souza, Jose wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 08:55 +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>>>> On 24/01/2024 08:19, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
>>>>>> Add reporting of the GuC submissio/VF interface version via GETPARAM
>>>>>> properties. Mesa intends to use this information to check for old
>>>>>> firmware versions with known bugs before enabling features like async
>>>>>> compute.
>>>>>
>>>>> There was
>>>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/560704/?series=124592&rev=1
>>>>> which does everything in one go so would be my preference.
>>>>
>>>> IMO Joonas version brings less burden to be maintained(no new struct).
>>>> But both versions works, please just get into some agreement so we
>>>> can move this forward.
>>>
>>> So I would really prefer the query. Simplified version would do like
>>> the compile tested only:
>> Vivaik's patch is definitely preferred. It is much cleaner to make one
>> single call than having to make four separate calls. It is also
>> extensible to other firmwares if required. The only blockage against it
>> was whether it was a good thing to report at all. If that blockage is no
>> longer valid then we should just merge the patch that has already been
>> discussed, polished, fixed, etc. rather than starting the whole process
>> from scratch.
>
> Agreed.
>
> Vivaik can you please rebase and send it again?
Note there was review feedback not addressed so do that too please.
AFAIR incorrect usage of copy item, pad/rsvd/mbz checking and questions
about padding in general. Last is why I proposed a simplified version
which is not future extensible and avoids the need for padding.
Regards,
Tvrtko
>
>
>>
>> And note that it is four calls not three. The code below is missing the
>> branch version number.
>>
>> John.
>>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_query.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_query.c
>>> index 00871ef99792..999687f6a3d4 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_query.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_query.c
>>> @@ -551,6 +551,37 @@ static int query_hwconfig_blob(struct
>>> drm_i915_private *i915,
>>> return hwconfig->size;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int
>>> +query_guc_submission_version(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>>> + struct drm_i915_query_item *query)
>>> +{
>>> + struct drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version __user *query_ptr =
>>> + u64_to_user_ptr(query->data_ptr);
>>> + struct drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version ver;
>>> + struct intel_guc *guc = &to_gt(i915)->uc.guc;
>>> + const size_t size = sizeof(ver);
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + if (!intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(&to_gt(i915)->uc))
>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>> +
>>> + ret = copy_query_item(&ver, size, size, query);
>>> + if (ret != 0)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + if (ver.major || ver.minor || ver.patch)
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> +
>>> + ver.major = guc->submission_version.major;
>>> + ver.minor = guc->submission_version.minor;
>>> + ver.patch = guc->submission_version.patch;
>>> +
>>> + if (copy_to_user(query_ptr, &ver, size))
>>> + return -EFAULT;
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static int (* const i915_query_funcs[])(struct drm_i915_private
>>> *dev_priv,
>>> struct drm_i915_query_item
>>> *query_item) = {
>>> query_topology_info,
>>> @@ -559,6 +590,7 @@ static int (* const i915_query_funcs[])(struct
>>> drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>>> query_memregion_info,
>>> query_hwconfig_blob,
>>> query_geometry_subslices,
>>> + query_guc_submission_version,
>>> };
>>>
>>> int i915_query_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct
>>> drm_file *file)
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> index 550c496ce76d..d80d9b5e1eda 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> @@ -3038,6 +3038,7 @@ struct drm_i915_query_item {
>>> * - %DRM_I915_QUERY_MEMORY_REGIONS (see struct
>>> drm_i915_query_memory_regions)
>>> * - %DRM_I915_QUERY_HWCONFIG_BLOB (see `GuC HWCONFIG blob
>>> uAPI`)
>>> * - %DRM_I915_QUERY_GEOMETRY_SUBSLICES (see struct
>>> drm_i915_query_topology_info)
>>> + * - %DRM_I915_QUERY_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION (see struct
>>> drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version)
>>> */
>>> __u64 query_id;
>>> #define DRM_I915_QUERY_TOPOLOGY_INFO 1
>>> @@ -3046,6 +3047,7 @@ struct drm_i915_query_item {
>>> #define DRM_I915_QUERY_MEMORY_REGIONS 4
>>> #define DRM_I915_QUERY_HWCONFIG_BLOB 5
>>> #define DRM_I915_QUERY_GEOMETRY_SUBSLICES 6
>>> +#define DRM_I915_QUERY_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION 7
>>> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>>>
>>> /**
>>> @@ -3591,6 +3593,15 @@ struct drm_i915_query_memory_regions {
>>> struct drm_i915_memory_region_info regions[];
>>> };
>>>
>>> +/**
>>> +* struct drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version - query GuC submission
>>> interface version
>>> +*/
>>> +struct drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version {
>>> + __u64 major;
>>> + __u64 minor;
>>> + __u64 patch;
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> /**
>>> * DOC: GuC HWCONFIG blob uAPI
>>> *
>>>
>>> It is not that much bigger that the triple get param and IMO nicer.
>>>
>>> But if there is no motivation to do it properly then feel free to
>>> proceed with this, I will not block it.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Tvrtko
>>>
>>> P.S.
>>> Probably still make sure to remove the reference to SR-IOV.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> During the time of that patch there was discussion whether firmware
>>>>> version or submission version was better. I vaguely remember someone
>>>>> raised an issue with the latter. Adding John in case he remembers.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
>>>>>> Cc: Jose Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Sagar Ghuge <sagar.ghuge@intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>>>> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>>>> 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>>>>> index 5c3fec63cb4c1..f176372debc54 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>>>>> @@ -113,6 +113,18 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device
>>>>>> *dev, void *data,
>>>>>> if (value < 0)
>>>>>> return value;
>>>>>> break;
>>>>>> + case I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MAJOR:
>>>>>> + case I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MINOR:
>>>>>> + case I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_PATCH:
>>>>>> + if (!intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(&to_gt(i915)->uc))
>>>>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>>>>> + if (param->param == I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MAJOR)
>>>>>> + value = to_gt(i915)->uc.guc.submission_version.major;
>>>>>> + else if (param->param ==
>>>>>> I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MINOR)
>>>>>> + value = to_gt(i915)->uc.guc.submission_version.minor;
>>>>>> + else
>>>>>> + value = to_gt(i915)->uc.guc.submission_version.patch;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> case I915_PARAM_MMAP_GTT_VERSION:
>>>>>> /* Though we've started our numbering from 1, and so
>>>>>> class all
>>>>>> * earlier versions as 0, in effect their value is
>>>>>> undefined as
>>>>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>>>>> index fd4f9574d177a..7d5a47f182542 100644
>>>>>> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>>>>> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>>>>> @@ -806,6 +806,19 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> #define I915_PARAM_PXP_STATUS 58
>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>> + * Query for the GuC submission/VF interface version number
>>>>>
>>>>> What is this VF you speak of? :/
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Tvrtko
>>>>>
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * -ENODEV is returned if GuC submission is not used
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * On success, returns the respective GuC submission/VF interface
>>>>>> major,
>>>>>> + * minor or patch version as per the requested parameter.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +#define I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MAJOR 59
>>>>>> +#define I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MINOR 60
>>>>>> +#define I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_PATCH 61
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>>>>>> /**
>>>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-07 8:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-24 8:19 [RFC PATCH] drm/i915: Add GETPARAM for GuC submission version Joonas Lahtinen
2024-01-24 8:43 ` ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for " Patchwork
2024-01-24 8:49 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2024-01-24 8:55 ` [RFC PATCH] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2024-01-24 19:55 ` John Harrison
2024-01-24 22:42 ` Kenneth Graunke
2024-02-01 18:25 ` Souza, Jose
2024-02-06 16:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2024-02-06 20:42 ` John Harrison
2024-02-06 20:51 ` Souza, Jose
2024-02-07 8:44 ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2024-02-07 11:36 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2024-02-07 17:58 ` John Harrison
2024-02-07 18:02 ` Souza, Jose
2024-01-24 13:35 ` Souza, Jose
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=5a190ddc-5739-4b39-86e4-afaef7b76244@linux.intel.com \
--to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=john.c.harrison@intel.com \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jose.souza@intel.com \
--cc=kenneth@whitecape.org \
--cc=paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=sagar.ghuge@intel.com \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com \
--cc=vivaik.balasubrawmanian@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