Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/9] drm/i915/pcode: Extend pcode functions for multiple gt's

[Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>]

Hi Ashutosh,

[...]

> -static bool skl_pcode_try_request(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox,
> -				  u32 request, u32 reply_mask, u32 reply,
> -				  u32 *status)
> +static bool __gt_pcode_try_request(struct intel_gt *gt, u32 mbox,

why is this becoming a '__' function?

> +				   u32 request, u32 reply_mask, u32 reply,
> +				   u32 *status)
>  {
> -	*status = __snb_pcode_rw(i915, mbox, &request, NULL, 500, 0, true);
> +	*status = __gt_pcode_rw(gt, mbox, &request, NULL, 500, 0, true);
>  
>  	return (*status == 0) && ((request & reply_mask) == reply);
>  }
>  
>  /**
> - * skl_pcode_request - send PCODE request until acknowledgment
> - * @i915: device private
> + * intel_gt_pcode_request - send PCODE request until acknowledgment
> + * @gt: gt
>   * @mbox: PCODE mailbox ID the request is targeted for
>   * @request: request ID
>   * @reply_mask: mask used to check for request acknowledgment
> @@ -158,16 +159,16 @@ static bool skl_pcode_try_request(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox,
>   * Returns 0 on success, %-ETIMEDOUT in case of a timeout, <0 in case of some
>   * other error as reported by PCODE.
>   */
> -int skl_pcode_request(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox, u32 request,
> -		      u32 reply_mask, u32 reply, int timeout_base_ms)
> +int intel_gt_pcode_request(struct intel_gt *gt, u32 mbox, u32 request,
> +			   u32 reply_mask, u32 reply, int timeout_base_ms)
>  {
>  	u32 status;
>  	int ret;
>  
> -	mutex_lock(&i915->sb_lock);
> +	mutex_lock(&gt->i915->sb_lock);
>  
>  #define COND \
> -	skl_pcode_try_request(i915, mbox, request, reply_mask, reply, &status)
> +	__gt_pcode_try_request(gt, mbox, request, reply_mask, reply, &status)
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Prime the PCODE by doing a request first. Normally it guarantees
> @@ -193,35 +194,48 @@ int skl_pcode_request(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox, u32 request,
>  	 * requests, and for any quirks of the PCODE firmware that delays
>  	 * the request completion.
>  	 */
> -	drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm,
> +	drm_dbg_kms(&gt->i915->drm,
>  		    "PCODE timeout, retrying with preemption disabled\n");
> -	drm_WARN_ON_ONCE(&i915->drm, timeout_base_ms > 3);
> +	drm_WARN_ON_ONCE(&gt->i915->drm, timeout_base_ms > 3);
>  	preempt_disable();
>  	ret = wait_for_atomic(COND, 50);
>  	preempt_enable();
>  
>  out:
> -	mutex_unlock(&i915->sb_lock);
> +	mutex_unlock(&gt->i915->sb_lock);
>  	return status ? status : ret;
>  #undef COND
>  }
>  
> +static int __gt_pcode_init(struct intel_gt *gt)
> +{
> +	int ret = intel_gt_pcode_request(gt, DG1_PCODE_STATUS,
> +					 DG1_UNCORE_GET_INIT_STATUS,
> +					 DG1_UNCORE_INIT_STATUS_COMPLETE,
> +					 DG1_UNCORE_INIT_STATUS_COMPLETE, 180000);
> +
> +	drm_dbg(&gt->i915->drm, "gt %d: PCODE init status %d\n", gt->info.id, ret);
> +
> +	if (ret)
> +		drm_err(&gt->i915->drm, "gt %d: Pcode did not report uncore initialization completion!\n",
> +			gt->info.id);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>  int intel_pcode_init(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>  {
> -	int ret = 0;
> +	struct intel_gt *gt;
> +	int i, ret = 0;
>  
>  	if (!IS_DGFX(i915))
>  		return ret;

we can take some freedom, if you don't mind, and declare ret
inside the for_each, and return 0 here. Just a small cosmetic.

>  
> -	ret = skl_pcode_request(i915, DG1_PCODE_STATUS,
> -				DG1_UNCORE_GET_INIT_STATUS,
> -				DG1_UNCORE_INIT_STATUS_COMPLETE,
> -				DG1_UNCORE_INIT_STATUS_COMPLETE, 180000);
> -
> -	drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "PCODE init status %d\n", ret);
> -
> -	if (ret)
> -		drm_err(&i915->drm, "Pcode did not report uncore initialization completion!\n");
> +	for_each_gt(gt, i915, i) {
> +		ret = __gt_pcode_init(gt);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
>  
> -	return ret;
> +	return 0;
>  }
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pcode.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pcode.h
> index 0962a17fac48..96c954ec91f9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pcode.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pcode.h
> @@ -8,16 +8,31 @@
>  
>  #include <linux/types.h>
>  
> +struct intel_gt;
>  struct drm_i915_private;
>  
> -int snb_pcode_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox, u32 *val, u32 *val1);
> -int snb_pcode_write_timeout(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox, u32 val,
> -			    int fast_timeout_us, int slow_timeout_ms);
> -#define snb_pcode_write(i915, mbox, val)			\
> +int intel_gt_pcode_read(struct intel_gt *gt, u32 mbox, u32 *val, u32 *val1);
> +
> +int intel_gt_pcode_write_timeout(struct intel_gt *gt, u32 mbox, u32 val,
> +				 int fast_timeout_us, int slow_timeout_ms);
> +
> +#define intel_gt_pcode_write(gt, mbox, val) \
> +	intel_gt_pcode_write_timeout(gt, mbox, val, 500, 0)
> +
> +int intel_gt_pcode_request(struct intel_gt *gt, u32 mbox, u32 request,
> +			   u32 reply_mask, u32 reply, int timeout_base_ms);
> +
> +#define snb_pcode_read(i915, mbox, val, val1) \
> +	intel_gt_pcode_read(&(i915)->gt0, mbox, val, val1)
> +
> +#define snb_pcode_write_timeout(i915, mbox, val, fast_timeout_us, slow_timeout_ms) \
> +	intel_gt_pcode_write_timeout(&(i915)->gt0, mbox, val, fast_timeout_us, slow_timeout_ms)
> +
> +#define snb_pcode_write(i915, mbox, val) \
>  	snb_pcode_write_timeout(i915, mbox, val, 500, 0)
>  
> -int skl_pcode_request(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox, u32 request,
> -		      u32 reply_mask, u32 reply, int timeout_base_ms);
> +#define skl_pcode_request(i915, mbox, request, reply_mask, reply, timeout_base_ms) \
> +	intel_gt_pcode_request(&(i915)->gt0, mbox, request, reply_mask, reply, timeout_base_ms)

to_gt(i915)

I guess this is just a replacement i915 to gt, I think it's all
correct and with the latter changed:

Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>

Thanks,
Andi