From: "Summers, Stuart" <stuart.summers@intel.com>
To: "intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org" <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"Vivekanandan,
Balasubramani" <balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
Cc: "Roper, Matthew D" <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe/device: Discard check for lmem_init
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 20:57:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a531d0f7bd469d3681c208e1e070afd73cd5df05.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251217125143.2430557-2-balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
On Wed, 2025-12-17 at 18:21 +0530, Balasubramani Vivekanandan wrote:
> Prior to lmem init check, driver is waiting for the pcode uncore_init
> status. uncore_init status will be asserted after the complete boot
> and
> initialization of the SoC by the pcode. uncore_init confirms that
> lmem
> init and mmio unblock has been already completed.
> It makes no sense to check for lmem init after the pcode uncore_init
> check. So it can be removed.
Matt has some good comments here. I'm also a little worried about
firmware bugs in early bring-up where we might go through the pcode
init but be missing the PCI config updates associated with lmem_init.
This at least guarantees that we're checking that here.
Thanks,
Stuart
>
> Signed-off-by: Balasubramani Vivekanandan
> <balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 67 +++-----------------------------
> --
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> index 1197f914ef77..3818d0cccb0e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> @@ -8,7 +8,6 @@
> #include <linux/aperture.h>
> #include <linux/delay.h>
> #include <linux/fault-inject.h>
> -#include <linux/iopoll.h>
> #include <linux/units.h>
>
> #include <drm/drm_atomic_helper.h>
> @@ -630,63 +629,6 @@ static int xe_set_dma_info(struct xe_device *xe)
> return err;
> }
>
> -static int lmem_initializing(struct xe_device *xe)
> -{
> - if (xe_mmio_read32(xe_root_tile_mmio(xe), GU_CNTL) &
> LMEM_INIT)
> - return 0;
> -
> - if (signal_pending(current))
> - return -EINTR;
> -
> - return 1;
> -}
> -
> -static int wait_for_lmem_ready(struct xe_device *xe)
> -{
> - const unsigned long TIMEOUT_SEC = 60;
> - unsigned long prev_jiffies;
> - int initializing;
> -
> - if (!IS_DGFX(xe))
> - return 0;
> -
> - if (IS_SRIOV_VF(xe))
> - return 0;
> -
> - if (!lmem_initializing(xe))
> - return 0;
> -
> - drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "Waiting for lmem initialization\n");
> - prev_jiffies = jiffies;
> -
> - /*
> - * The boot firmware initializes local memory and
> - * assesses its health. If memory training fails,
> - * the punit will have been instructed to keep the GT powered
> - * down.we won't be able to communicate with it
> - *
> - * If the status check is done before punit updates the
> register,
> - * it can lead to the system being unusable.
> - * use a timeout and defer the probe to prevent this.
> - */
> - poll_timeout_us(initializing = lmem_initializing(xe),
> - initializing <= 0,
> - 20 * USEC_PER_MSEC, TIMEOUT_SEC *
> USEC_PER_SEC, true);
> - if (initializing < 0)
> - return initializing;
> -
> - if (initializing) {
> - drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "lmem not initialized by
> firmware\n");
> - return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> - }
> -
> - drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "lmem ready after %ums",
> - jiffies_to_msecs(jiffies - prev_jiffies));
> -
> - return 0;
> -}
> -ALLOW_ERROR_INJECTION(wait_for_lmem_ready, ERRNO); /* See
> xe_pci_probe() */
> -
> static void vf_update_device_info(struct xe_device *xe)
> {
> xe_assert(xe, IS_SRIOV_VF(xe));
> @@ -740,6 +682,11 @@ int xe_device_probe_early(struct xe_device *xe)
> if (IS_SRIOV_VF(xe))
> vf_update_device_info(xe);
>
> + /*
> + * Check for pcode uncore_init status to confirm if the SoC
> + * initialization is complete. Until done, any MMIO or lmem
> access from
> + * the driver will be blocked
> + */
> err = xe_pcode_probe_early(xe);
> if (err || xe_survivability_mode_is_requested(xe)) {
> int save_err = err;
> @@ -756,10 +703,6 @@ int xe_device_probe_early(struct xe_device *xe)
> return save_err;
> }
>
> - err = wait_for_lmem_ready(xe);
> - if (err)
> - return err;
> -
> xe->wedged.mode = xe_modparam.wedged_mode;
>
> err = xe_device_vram_alloc(xe);
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-18 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-17 12:51 [PATCH] drm/xe/device: Discard check for lmem_init Balasubramani Vivekanandan
2025-12-17 13:54 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for " Patchwork
2025-12-17 14:53 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-12-17 23:12 ` [PATCH] " Matt Roper
2025-12-18 15:57 ` Ville Syrjälä
2025-12-19 14:38 ` Vivekanandan, Balasubramani
2025-12-19 14:27 ` Vivekanandan, Balasubramani
2025-12-19 16:42 ` Matt Roper
2025-12-18 11:42 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure for " Patchwork
2025-12-18 20:57 ` Summers, Stuart [this message]
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=a531d0f7bd469d3681c208e1e070afd73cd5df05.camel@intel.com \
--to=stuart.summers@intel.com \
--cc=balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@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