From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E25DC433F5 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:18:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF99010E02B; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:18:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 804FE10E02B for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:18:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1647962293; x=1679498293; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/A6/3BijKG4GUAX1WfSG+0Emmy74BnyDZVKa2i06aA4=; b=jNpcMYNhKNe5QgeGavYgF+NmbE4VkwQRmbMV3j/RDjXXieSk1OqQafhZ mP2n47h5nkN26GOfOMW4oLTkGLan8cOq5rUli+S0x7z4b5BppcPiajTMR g1gnL0iizIq+v0+d1hrYzKCQS67LABXTMK7nSu20SUuDJpWfc1UiD7Q36 zQ4as6nstOvg1Z0SXZoTF9FDDdOsIl/ybue0pmUl9XNKwXNwSWq75GIP9 8yd2/lw2WRPlgz31eOLhJRS4aADkie/juWXJ+MIBe9eEL8cQywCD3r4qh MDHvyImuxu6RChdrt7p26klh4IdAW+b57w6JkpfyT+yF0WVOpTslmyy2h Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10294"; a="255407866" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,201,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="255407866" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Mar 2022 08:18:10 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,201,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="560422647" Received: from srobinso-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.230.39]) ([10.213.230.39]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Mar 2022 08:18:09 -0700 Message-ID: <68a4e3a0-215a-27c1-0bd4-d17fd8de52c4@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:18:05 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Jani Nikula , Lucas De Marchi References: <20220215234146.304035-1-casey.g.bowman@intel.com> <20220215234146.304035-2-casey.g.bowman@intel.com> <20220322020144.thmvicqtlpcmkf6l@ldmartin-desk2> <87r16ujni0.fsf@intel.com> <20220322142719.f72lpelqsw7vbnuy@ldmartin-desk2> <87lex2jb3i.fsf@intel.com> From: Tvrtko Ursulin Organization: Intel Corporation UK Plc In-Reply-To: <87lex2jb3i.fsf@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] i915/drm: Split out x86/arm64 for run_as_guest X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, michael.cheng@intel.com Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On 22/03/2022 14:49, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 22 Mar 2022, Lucas De Marchi wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 12:21:59PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Lucas De Marchi wrote: >>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 04:34:49PM -0700, Casey Bowman wrote: >>>>> Wanted to ping this older thread to find out where we stand with this patch, >>>>> Are we OK with the current state of these changes? >>>>> >>>>> With more recent information gathered from feedback on other patches, would >>>>> we prefer changing this to a more arch-neutral control flow? >>>>> >>>>> e.g. >>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86) >>>>> ... >>>>> #else >>>>> ... >>>>> #endif >>>>> >>>>> Would we also prefer this RFC series be merged or would it be preferred to >>>>> create a new series instead? >>>> >>>> for this specific function, that is used in only 2 places I think it's >>>> ok to do: >>>> >>>> static inline bool run_as_guest(void) >>>> { >>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86) >>>> return !hypervisor_is_type(X86_HYPER_NATIVE); >>>> #else >>>> /* Not supported yet */ >>>> return false; >>>> #endif >>>> } >>>> >>>> For PCH it doesn't really matter as we don't execute that function >>>> for discrete. For intel_vtd_active() I figure anything other than >>>> x86 would be fine with false here. >>>> >>>> Jani, that this look good to you? >>> >>> It's more important to me to get this out of i915_drv.h, which is not >>> supposed to be a collection of random stuff anymore. I've sent patches >>> to this effect but they've stalled a bit. >> >> do you have a patch moving this particular one? got a link? > > Yeah, but it was basically shot down by Tvrtko [1], and I stalled there. > > I'd just like to get all this cruft out of i915_drv.h. Whenever we have > a file where the name isn't super specific, we seem to have a tendency > of turning it into a dumping ground for random crap. So I'd really like > to move this out of there *before* expanding on it. Sounds like we had agreement on what tweaks to make and I conceded to live for now with the IMO wrongly named intel_vtd_run_as_guest. (I mean I really disagree with file name being trumps, which I think this example illustrates - this is i915 asking whether the kernel is running as guest so intel_vtd_ prefix is just wrong. Intel VT-d is the iommu thingy so it makes no sense when called from PCH detection. But I have no better ideas at the moment. We can call it i915_run_as_guest, to signify function belongs to i915, but then we lose the first parameter names the function rule.) But in any case I don't see that I created any blockers in this thread. AFAICS just a respin with intel_vtd_active taking struct device is needed and job done. Regards, Tvrtko