Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/i915: simplify ULT/ULX subplatform detection

[Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>]

On Wed, 08 May 2024, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 03:56:51PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> For HSW/BDW ULX machines are also considered ULT. For the sake of
>> simplicity and clarity, handle this at the IS_XXX_ULT() macro level
>> instead of two simultaneous subplatforms.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h          | 9 ++++++---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c | 4 ----
>>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> index d1d21d433766..9c57af484ba8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> @@ -562,19 +562,22 @@ IS_SUBPLATFORM(const struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>>  	IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_ALDERLAKE_P, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_RPLU)
>>  #define IS_HASWELL_EARLY_SDV(i915) (IS_HASWELL(i915) && \
>>  				    (INTEL_DEVID(i915) & 0xFF00) == 0x0C00)
>> +/* BDW ULX machines are also considered ULT. */
>>  #define IS_BROADWELL_ULT(i915) \
>> -	IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_BROADWELL, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULT)
>> +	(IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_BROADWELL, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULT) || \
>> +	 IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_BROADWELL, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULX))
>>  #define IS_BROADWELL_ULX(i915) \
>>  	IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_BROADWELL, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULX)
>>  #define IS_BROADWELL_GT3(i915)	(IS_BROADWELL(i915) && \
>>  				 INTEL_INFO(i915)->gt == 3)
>> +/* HSW ULX machines are also considered ULT. */
>>  #define IS_HASWELL_ULT(i915) \
>> -	IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_HASWELL, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULT)
>> +	(IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_HASWELL, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULT) ||	\
>> +	 IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_HASWELL, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULX))
>>  #define IS_HASWELL_GT3(i915)	(IS_HASWELL(i915) && \
>>  				 INTEL_INFO(i915)->gt == 3)
>>  #define IS_HASWELL_GT1(i915)	(IS_HASWELL(i915) && \
>>  				 INTEL_INFO(i915)->gt == 1)
>> -/* ULX machines are also considered ULT. */
>>  #define IS_HASWELL_ULX(i915) \
>>  	IS_SUBPLATFORM(i915, INTEL_HASWELL, INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULX)
>>  #define IS_SKYLAKE_ULT(i915) \
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>> index 27b4a5882be3..a72efa919602 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>> @@ -232,10 +232,6 @@ static void intel_device_info_subplatform_init(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>>  	} else if (find_devid(devid, subplatform_ulx_ids,
>>  			      ARRAY_SIZE(subplatform_ulx_ids))) {
>>  		mask = BIT(INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULX);
>> -		if (IS_HASWELL(i915) || IS_BROADWELL(i915)) {
>> -			/* ULX machines are also considered ULT. */
>> -			mask |= BIT(INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_ULT);
>> -		}
>
> Oh... it is a long time since I don't look to these bits,
> but I don't believe that the define above would cover this case here.
>
> It seems that you will miss the bits in this platform_mask.

How come?

What this does is make ULX platforms also match the ULT checks. Thus I'm
changing the ULT macros to include ULX subplatforms.

Or I don't understand what you mean.

BR,
Jani.




>
>>  	} else if (find_devid(devid, subplatform_portf_ids,
>>  			      ARRAY_SIZE(subplatform_portf_ids))) {
>>  		mask = BIT(INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_PORTF);
>> -- 
>> 2.39.2
>> 

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel