From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
<intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe/display: Use a single early init call for display
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 09:27:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z1ryxbX57XwNPa0o@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <83cf254b-da30-4375-9720-583bd8382230@lankhorst.se>
On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 07:32:08PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Hey Jani,
>
> I believe at least for the platforms xe cares about (gen12+), display is
> sufficiently separated that everything can be performed in a single init
> call before we enable interrupts.
>
> Because of the strict separation between xe and display, it should be fine
> to keep the ordering as-is from this patch.
>
> (some xe init here)
> xe_display_init_nommio()
> (some xe init here)
> xe_display_init_noirq()
> (some xe init here)
> xe_display_init_noaccel()
> (some xe init here)
> irq_enable()
>
> should functionally be the same as
>
> (some xe init here)
> xe_display_init_early()
> (some xe init here)
> irq_enable()
hmm, but also I don't see a problem of this:
xe_display_init_nommio()
some xe init here)
xe_display_init_noirq()
xe_display_init_noaccel()
(some xe init here)
>
> When you look at it from the xe driver point of view.
> Nothing else in xe depends on display, and interrupts are not enabled until
> after this init call.
>
> We must deviate from i915 with interrupts, because enabling interrupts may
> require memirqs, which performs a GGTT allocation.
We will eventually have to deal with the IRQ handling in a more unified way.
But for now, it could be 2 sequences in the call like that.
My goal is to make xe_display.c only pure wrapper for checking the xe
module parameter for display and calling the exact i915 function.
I understand that we might end up with some difference sequences, but the
difference sequence needs to live in i915/display and the xe_display.c
be a pure wrapper. That's the only way that we will be able to get to
a fully separate display at some point.
If we continue to add deviations we will delay that day even further...
>
> The long explanation might be too long to stuff into the commit message, but
> I hope it makes sense. :-)
>
> Cheers,
> ~Maarten
>
> Den 2024-12-10 kl. 10:35, skrev Jani Nikula:
> > On Mon, 09 Dec 2024, Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se> wrote:
> > > Instead of 3 different calls, it should be safe to unify to a single
> > > call now. This makes the init sequence cleaner, and display less
> > > tangled.
> >
> > Needs more explanation.
> >
> > I thought the goal was to *unify* i915 and xe display init/cleanup. This
> > diverges them more, with actually functionally different things rather
> > than just slightly different ordering.
> >
> > BR,
> > Jani.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>
> > > ---
> > > Rebase
> > >
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c | 73 +++++++------------------
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h | 8 +--
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 10 +---
> > > 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> > > index 317fa66adf189..b013a4db11183 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> > > @@ -101,19 +101,25 @@ int xe_display_create(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > return drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, display_destroy, NULL);
> > > }
> > > -static void xe_display_fini_nommio(struct drm_device *dev, void *dummy)
> > > +static void xe_display_fini_early(void *arg)
> > > {
> > > - struct xe_device *xe = to_xe_device(dev);
> > > + struct xe_device *xe = arg;
> > > struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
> > > if (!xe->info.probe_display)
> > > return;
> > > + intel_display_driver_remove_nogem(display);
> > > + intel_display_driver_remove_noirq(display);
> > > + intel_opregion_cleanup(display);
> > > intel_power_domains_cleanup(display);
> > > }
> > > -int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > +int xe_display_init_early(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > {
> > > + struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
> > > + int err;
> > > +
> > > if (!xe->info.probe_display)
> > > return 0;
> > > @@ -123,29 +129,6 @@ int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > /* This must be called before any calls to HAS_PCH_* */
> > > intel_detect_pch(xe);
> > > - return drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, xe_display_fini_nommio, xe);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > -static void xe_display_fini_noirq(void *arg)
> > > -{
> > > - struct xe_device *xe = arg;
> > > - struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
> > > -
> > > - if (!xe->info.probe_display)
> > > - return;
> > > -
> > > - intel_display_driver_remove_noirq(display);
> > > - intel_opregion_cleanup(display);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > -int xe_display_init_noirq(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > -{
> > > - struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
> > > - int err;
> > > -
> > > - if (!xe->info.probe_display)
> > > - return 0;
> > > -
> > > intel_display_driver_early_probe(display);
> > > /* Early display init.. */
> > > @@ -162,38 +145,20 @@ int xe_display_init_noirq(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > intel_display_device_info_runtime_init(display);
> > > err = intel_display_driver_probe_noirq(display);
> > > - if (err) {
> > > - intel_opregion_cleanup(display);
> > > - return err;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > - return devm_add_action_or_reset(xe->drm.dev, xe_display_fini_noirq, xe);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > -static void xe_display_fini_noaccel(void *arg)
> > > -{
> > > - struct xe_device *xe = arg;
> > > - struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
> > > -
> > > - if (!xe->info.probe_display)
> > > - return;
> > > -
> > > - intel_display_driver_remove_nogem(display);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > -int xe_display_init_noaccel(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > -{
> > > - struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
> > > - int err;
> > > -
> > > - if (!xe->info.probe_display)
> > > - return 0;
> > > + if (err)
> > > + goto err_opregion;
> > > err = intel_display_driver_probe_nogem(display);
> > > if (err)
> > > - return err;
> > > + goto err_noirq;
> > > - return devm_add_action_or_reset(xe->drm.dev, xe_display_fini_noaccel, xe);
> > > + return devm_add_action_or_reset(xe->drm.dev, xe_display_fini_early, xe);
> > > +err_noirq:
> > > + intel_display_driver_remove_noirq(display);
> > > + intel_power_domains_cleanup(display);
> > > +err_opregion:
> > > + intel_opregion_cleanup(display);
> > > + return err;
> > > }
> > > int xe_display_init(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h
> > > index 233f81a26c255..e2a99624f7064 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h
> > > @@ -20,9 +20,7 @@ int xe_display_create(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > int xe_display_probe(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > -int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > -int xe_display_init_noirq(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > -int xe_display_init_noaccel(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > +int xe_display_init_early(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > int xe_display_init(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > void xe_display_fini(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > @@ -54,9 +52,7 @@ static inline int xe_display_create(struct xe_device *xe) { return 0; }
> > > static inline int xe_display_probe(struct xe_device *xe) { return 0; }
> > > -static inline int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) { return 0; }
> > > -static inline int xe_display_init_noirq(struct xe_device *xe) { return 0; }
> > > -static inline int xe_display_init_noaccel(struct xe_device *xe) { return 0; }
> > > +static inline int xe_display_init_early(struct xe_device *xe) { return 0; }
> > > static inline int xe_display_init(struct xe_device *xe) { return 0; }
> > > static inline void xe_display_fini(struct xe_device *xe) {}
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> > > index fbec176ee64ad..c9c0b74c74ddb 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> > > @@ -639,10 +639,6 @@ int xe_device_probe(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > return err;
> > > xe->info.mem_region_mask = 1;
> > > - err = xe_display_init_nommio(xe);
> > > - if (err)
> > > - return err;
> > > -
> > > err = xe_set_dma_info(xe);
> > > if (err)
> > > return err;
> > > @@ -697,10 +693,6 @@ int xe_device_probe(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > if (err)
> > > return err;
> > > - err = xe_display_init_noirq(xe);
> > > - if (err)
> > > - return err;
> > > -
> > > err = probe_has_flat_ccs(xe);
> > > if (err)
> > > goto err;
> > > @@ -724,7 +716,7 @@ int xe_device_probe(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > * This is the reason the first allocation needs to be done
> > > * inside display.
> > > */
> > > - err = xe_display_init_noaccel(xe);
> > > + err = xe_display_init_early(xe);
> > > if (err)
> > > goto err;
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-12 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-06 18:59 [PATCH 0/5] drm/xe/display: Rework display init for reducing flickering Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-06 18:59 ` [PATCH 1/5] drm/xe/display: Add intel_plane_initial_vblank_wait Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-06 18:59 ` [PATCH 2/5] drm/xe: Remove double pageflip Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-06 18:59 ` [PATCH 3/5] drm/xe: Move suballocator init to after display init Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-06 18:59 ` [PATCH 4/5] drm/xe: Defer irq init until after xe_display_init_noaccel Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-09 11:17 ` [PATCH v2] " Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-06 18:59 ` [PATCH 5/5] drm/xe/display: Use a single early init call for display Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-09 15:51 ` [PATCH] " Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-10 9:35 ` Jani Nikula
2024-12-11 18:32 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2024-12-12 14:27 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2024-12-06 20:37 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe/display: Rework display init for reducing flickering Patchwork
2024-12-06 20:37 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2024-12-06 20:39 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2024-12-06 20:57 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-12-06 20:59 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-12-06 21:00 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-12-06 21:24 ` ✗ Xe.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2024-12-07 1:36 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork
2024-12-09 10:39 ` [PATCH 0/5] " Jani Nikula
2024-12-09 14:33 ` ✗ CI.Patch_applied: failure for drm/xe/display: Rework display init for reducing flickering. (rev2) Patchwork
2024-12-09 15:56 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe/display: Rework display init for reducing flickering. (rev3) Patchwork
2024-12-09 15:56 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2024-12-09 15:58 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2024-12-09 16:16 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-12-09 16:18 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-12-09 16:20 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-12-09 16:37 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-12-09 17:32 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: 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=Z1ryxbX57XwNPa0o@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=dev@lankhorst.se \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).