public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa@intel.com>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
	"Syrjala, Ville" <ville.syrjala@intel.com>,
	rodrigo.vivi@intel.com,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2 3/3] drm/i915/rpl-s: Enable guc submission by default
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 11:57:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87czmso6l7.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211120002921.1939452-4-anusha.srivatsa@intel.com>

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021, Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa@intel.com> wrote:
> Though, RPL-S is defined as subplatform of ADL-S, unlike
> ADL-S, it has GuC submission by default.
>
> v2: Remove extra parenthesis (Jani)
>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Swathi Dhanavanthri <swathi.dhanavanthri@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> index 2fef3b0bbe95..6aa843a1c25f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ static void uc_expand_default_options(struct intel_uc *uc)
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Intermediate platforms are HuC authentication only */
> -	if (IS_ALDERLAKE_S(i915)) {
> +	if (IS_ALDERLAKE_S(i915) && !IS_RAPTORLAKE_S(i915)) {

I know I looked through the previous version, but I only realized this
now. The above just feels wrong. Like, if it's ADL-S it obviously can't
be RPL-S, so why the check.

We've had this type of thing before when IS_VALLEYVIEW() used to mean
VLV || CHV, and you'd have these really confusing checks:

	if (IS_VALLEYVIEW() && !IS_CHERRYVIEW())

We had to change that later on, and it was pretty annoying.

I'm really sorry I didn't spot this before, but I firmly believe adding
a platform check macro IS_RAPTORLAKE_S() as a subplatform check is the
wrong thing to do.

I think there are maybe three options:

1) Add RPL-S as a full blown platform of its own. Convert
   IS_ALDERLAKE_S() checks to IS_ALDERLAKE_S() || IS_RAPTORLAKE_S(). If
   we think there's going to be more differences than just the guc
   submission, this is the way to go.

2) Add RPL-S as a subplatform of ADL-S like here, but then don't add a
   platform macro IS_RAPTORLAKE_S(). Make the check something that
   conveys the subplatform idea. See all the users of IS_SUBPLATFORM()
   in i915_drv.h; for example IS_DG2_G10(). It's obvious it's a DG2 but
   subtype G10. So maybe IS_ADLS_RPLS(), I don't know.

3) Add RPL-S PCI IDs as ADL-S with separate device info, but add a
   feature flag for the guc submission default. Then RPL-S does not
   exist as a platform or subplatform in code, rather as ADL-S, but the
   difference is recorded via flags.


BR,
Jani.




>  		i915->params.enable_guc = ENABLE_GUC_LOAD_HUC;
>  		return;
>  	}

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center

  reply	other threads:[~2021-11-22  9:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-20  0:29 [Intel-gfx] [v2 0/3] Introduce Raptor Lake S Anusha Srivatsa
2021-11-20  0:29 ` [Intel-gfx] [v2 1/3] drm/i915/rpl-s: Add PCI IDS for " Anusha Srivatsa
2021-11-22 10:19   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-11-30 10:33     ` Srivatsa, Anusha
2021-11-20  0:29 ` [Intel-gfx] [v2 2/3] drm/i915/rpl-s: Add PCH Support " Anusha Srivatsa
2021-11-20  0:29 ` [Intel-gfx] [v2 3/3] drm/i915/rpl-s: Enable guc submission by default Anusha Srivatsa
2021-11-22  9:57   ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2021-11-30 11:09     ` Srivatsa, Anusha
2021-11-30 11:23       ` Jani Nikula
2021-11-20  1:12 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Introduce Raptor Lake S (rev2) Patchwork
2021-11-20  1:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2021-11-20  1:41 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-11-20  5:56 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork

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=87czmso6l7.fsf@intel.com \
    --to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=anusha.srivatsa@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ville.syrjala@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