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 D6B22C433F5 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:26:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6C910E126; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:26:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30A4010E126 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:26:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1647962810; x=1679498810; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:mime-version; bh=iObjUcLrrk+RuLRkoQLPdyr0RC98+oOWZNfn7BM3kBg=; b=Rg6HRViH5nFtJqwzad87r8rilB6ag1nHV9Qa+WeHVtcnJXBiZOZwH9gS ouKOnnJ0bl1g37f6rbXgWg4flzz1OGK4Yln1SdfCHH1ezsap3cKmKIfuO hQu6wNjpdlbv1dKETw4hkskFK9y8r4qcxpgUpFJFaq5NjcZucemxKMDM2 VBKKBDM/UybJPFvnq71xudOZTRY2q/BhcEtC+l+gbBa0cZMnxAGMkF1Y1 QTTbCN1xDJMgGhBW6x2N+ntfUymtcNx6G0abekdvv2rpKGy+49ASVrBdG DbWHSIQ8JN0EDPyeCg3sCzV1UJqUDccHeD6KP3/Z8/kIgcDmin6vIb9G7 A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10294"; a="257796743" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,201,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="257796743" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Mar 2022 08:26:49 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,201,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="560426157" Received: from sburacze-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.252.58.237]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Mar 2022 08:26:46 -0700 From: Jani Nikula To: Tvrtko Ursulin , Lucas De Marchi In-Reply-To: <68a4e3a0-215a-27c1-0bd4-d17fd8de52c4@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo 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> <68a4e3a0-215a-27c1-0bd4-d17fd8de52c4@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 17:26:44 +0200 Message-ID: <87ils6j9e3.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 Tue, 22 Mar 2022, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > 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.) I think the "first parameter names the function" rule has backfired in gem/gt land, because it's pretty difficult to figure out *where* you'd expect to find or place functions. BR, Jani. > > 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 -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center