From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: "José Roberto de Souza" <jose.souza@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-xe] [PATCH v4] drm/xe: Make explicit that exec uAPI expects canonical addresses
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2023 18:25:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZMvxIju06O/DNRel@DUT025-TGLU.fm.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230803153016.94282-1-jose.souza@intel.com>
On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 08:30:16AM -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> The batch buffer address in exec uAPI is used when emitting
> MI_BATCH_BUFFER_START that expect canonical addresses in future
> platforms, for current ones the bits above 57 for PVC and 47 for
> other platforms are ignored.
>
> So the safest approach is to require canonical address for all
> platforms supported by Xe to avoid uAPI breaks.
>
> v2:
> - fix check for non parallel engines
>
> v3:
> - fix style
>
> v4:
> - replace XE_IOCTL_ERR by XE_IOCTL_DBG
>
> BSpec: 60223 59475 45718
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 7 +++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h | 2 ++
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h | 4 ++--
> 4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> index 766df07de979c..9a4995304328e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> @@ -500,3 +500,10 @@ void xe_device_mem_access_put(struct xe_device *xe)
>
> XE_WARN_ON(ref < 0);
> }
> +
> +u64 xe_device_canonical_addr(struct xe_device *xe, u64 address)
> +{
> + const int high_address_bit = xe->info.dma_mask_size > 47 ? 57 : 47;
Do we have defines for this somewhere in Xe? We probably do.
Also it should be 56, right?
Matt
> +
> + return sign_extend64(address, high_address_bit);
> +}
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
> index 71582094834c6..a061b348f25e2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
> @@ -143,6 +143,8 @@ void xe_device_mem_access_put(struct xe_device *xe);
> void xe_device_assert_mem_access(struct xe_device *xe);
> bool xe_device_mem_access_ongoing(struct xe_device *xe);
>
> +u64 xe_device_canonical_addr(struct xe_device *xe, u64 address);
> +
> static inline bool xe_device_in_fault_mode(struct xe_device *xe)
> {
> return xe->usm.num_vm_in_fault_mode != 0;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec.c
> index 8a5b614df0900..4f651a042e560 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec.c
> @@ -229,6 +229,22 @@ int xe_exec_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *file)
> err = -EFAULT;
> goto err_syncs;
> }
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < q->width; i++) {
> + const u64 canonical_addr = xe_device_canonical_addr(xe, addresses[i]);
> +
> + if (XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, addresses[i] != canonical_addr)) {
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + goto err_syncs;
> + }
> + }
> + } else {
> + const u64 canonical_addr = xe_device_canonical_addr(xe, args->address);
> +
> + if (XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, args->address != canonical_addr)) {
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + goto err_syncs;
> + }
> }
>
> /*
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h
> index 86f16d50e9ccc..477072fd6c207 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h
> @@ -865,8 +865,8 @@ struct drm_xe_exec {
> __u64 syncs;
>
> /**
> - * @address: address of batch buffer if num_batch_buffer == 1 or an
> - * array of batch buffer addresses
> + * @address: canonical address of batch buffer if num_batch_buffer == 1
> + * or an array of batch buffer canonical addresses
> */
> __u64 address;
>
> --
> 2.41.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-03 18:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-03 15:30 [Intel-xe] [PATCH v4] drm/xe: Make explicit that exec uAPI expects canonical addresses José Roberto de Souza
2023-08-03 16:02 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe: Make explicit that exec uAPI expects canonical addresses (rev4) Patchwork
2023-08-03 16:02 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2023-08-03 16:03 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2023-08-03 16:07 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2023-08-03 16:08 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2023-08-03 16:08 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2023-08-03 18:25 ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2023-08-03 18:46 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v4] drm/xe: Make explicit that exec uAPI expects canonical addresses Souza, Jose
2023-08-04 8:33 ` [Intel-xe] ○ CI.BAT: info for drm/xe: Make explicit that exec uAPI expects canonical addresses (rev4) 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=ZMvxIju06O/DNRel@DUT025-TGLU.fm.intel.com \
--to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jose.souza@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