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 5EC20C77B7C for ; Mon, 1 May 2023 20:08:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDB3010E339; Mon, 1 May 2023 20:08:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CC2210E324; Mon, 1 May 2023 20:08:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1682971713; x=1714507713; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to: references:mime-version; bh=yhpYZIfpyDvWUAtqNM4ELWH15uUgLgVuXvlE/ia4aTw=; b=YRHiRRFjKSEJ4kUUTWUShaCRWEU2zIbbiqTmTru8I2FL/taRdvE86sj0 Lws2HsIHcXh/6Wxp0WviUkKhA7C/dhvqzKqIRDi1l4CWIaBDRsDWBZds7 H7OKPr4DVJajSNBeJpC8/nwPORRFoLbuVBhgZWytxeE1+1k0Jdypk65vd N2eFvNlh0UttubOyigqoFSFSgLLGDpBo9Ayf1c4i3B0HHbdJWiGgNjFLS IjPMMFJf9EzXPLOVvD6b3791kYzgCQ8TOxDkBfYGLjWdwaDVhyAFpVMwY r1vbXWUE7Aqe9tD9t+4uJCDZDGCvFrVLvTou/OzQrPNYgm3vL256isTOi g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10697"; a="350304974" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.99,242,1677571200"; d="scan'208";a="350304974" Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 May 2023 13:08:31 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10697"; a="840009108" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.99,242,1677571200"; d="scan'208";a="840009108" Received: from adixit-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO adixit-arch.intel.com) ([10.212.211.86]) by fmsmga001-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 May 2023 13:08:31 -0700 Date: Mon, 01 May 2023 13:01:45 -0700 Message-ID: <87wn1rkehi.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> From: "Dixit, Ashutosh" To: John Harrison In-Reply-To: <99a016bd-d3da-154c-4bca-46ff66bb1932@intel.com> References: <20230425201926.99086-1-John.C.Harrison@Intel.com> <20230425201926.99086-2-John.C.Harrison@Intel.com> <874jp29urv.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> <99a016bd-d3da-154c-4bca-46ff66bb1932@intel.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/28.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] lib/intel_decode: Decode Gen12 ring/batch instructions correctly 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: IGT-Dev@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org, Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On Mon, 01 May 2023 12:44:14 -0700, John Harrison wrote: > > On 4/26/2023 14:51, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 13:19:25 -0700, John.C.Harrison@Intel.com wrote: > >> @@ -3623,7 +3624,17 @@ decode_3d_965(struct intel_decode *ctx) > >> return len; > >> > >> case 0x7a00: > >> - if (IS_GEN6(devid) || IS_GEN7(devid)) { > >> + if (IS_GEN12(devid)) { > >> + if (len != 6) > >> + fprintf(out, "Bad count in PIPE_CONTROL\n"); > >> + instr_out(ctx, 0, "PIPE_CONTROL\n"); > >> + instr_out(ctx, 1, "flags\n"); > >> + instr_out(ctx, 2, "write address low\n"); > >> + instr_out(ctx, 3, "write address high\n"); > >> + instr_out(ctx, 4, "write data low\n"); > >> + instr_out(ctx, 5, "write data high\n"); > >> + return len; > > Is there a reference for this? I can review but have no idea what's going > > on here. The rest of the patch looks good. Thanks. > Just the bspec definition of PIPE_CONTROL. On later gens it has more data - > 64bit rather than 32bit addressing I think. Reviewed-by: Ashutosh Dixit