From: "Ghimiray, Himal Prasad" <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
To: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] RFC drm/xe: re-order lmem init check and wait for initialization to complete
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 16:38:58 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f144e5d4-46d3-41c4-a9eb-79eb62fd575c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240308085517.2030484-3-riana.tauro@intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4431 bytes --]
On 08-03-2024 14:25, Riana Tauro wrote:
> Lmem init check should be done only after pcode initialization
> status is complete. Move lmem init check after pcode status
> check. Also wait for a short while after pcode status check
> to allow completion of the task.
>
> Failing to do so, can lead to aborting the module load
> leaving the system unusable. Wait until the lmem initialization
> is complete within a timeout (60s) or till the user aborts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Riana Tauro<riana.tauro@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_mmio.c | 29 -------------------
> 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> index 83dd60f68566..4806e7806be5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> @@ -413,12 +413,59 @@ static int xe_set_dma_info(struct xe_device *xe)
> return err;
> }
>
> +static int verify_lmem_ready(struct xe_gt *gt)
> +{
> + return xe_mmio_read32(gt, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT;
> +}
> +
> +static int wait_for_lmem_ready(struct xe_device *xe)
> +{
> + struct xe_gt *gt = xe_root_mmio_gt(xe);
> + unsigned long timeout, start;
> +
> + if (!IS_DGFX(xe))
> + return 0;
> +
> + if (IS_SRIOV_VF(xe))
> + return 0;
> + /*
> + * 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
> + * and we should not continue with driver initialization.
> + */
> + if (verify_lmem_ready(gt))
> + return 0;
> +
> + drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "Waiting for lmem initialisation\n");
> +
> + start = jiffies;
> + timeout = start + msecs_to_jiffies(60 * 1000); /* 60 sec! */
> +
> + do {
> + if (signal_pending(current))
> + return -EINTR;
> +
> + if (time_after(jiffies, timeout))
> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
How about adding reason for deferred probing? lmem initialization timedout ?
Reviewed-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray<himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
> +
> + msleep(20);
> +
> + } while (!verify_lmem_ready(gt));
> +
> + drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "lmem ready after %ums",
> + jiffies_to_msecs(jiffies - start));
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * xe_device_probe_early: Device early probe
> * @xe: xe device instance
> *
> * Initialize MMIO resources that don't require any
> - * knowledge about tile count. Also initialize pcode
> + * knowledge about tile count. Also initialize pcode and
> + * check vram initialization on root tile.
> *
> * Return: 0 on success, error code on failure
> */
> @@ -438,6 +485,10 @@ int xe_device_probe_early(struct xe_device *xe)
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> + err = wait_for_lmem_ready(xe);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_mmio.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_mmio.c
> index 7ba2477452d7..7fc0c5453b21 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_mmio.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_mmio.c
> @@ -360,30 +360,6 @@ static void mmio_fini(struct drm_device *drm, void *arg)
> iounmap(xe->mem.vram.mapping);
> }
>
> -static int xe_verify_lmem_ready(struct xe_device *xe)
> -{
> - struct xe_gt *gt = xe_root_mmio_gt(xe);
> -
> - if (!IS_DGFX(xe))
> - return 0;
> -
> - if (IS_SRIOV_VF(xe))
> - return 0;
> -
> - /*
> - * 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
> - * and we should not continue with driver initialization.
> - */
> - if (!(xe_mmio_read32(gt, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) {
> - drm_err(&xe->drm, "VRAM not initialized by firmware\n");
> - return -ENODEV;
> - }
> -
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> int xe_mmio_init(struct xe_device *xe)
> {
> struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(xe->drm.dev);
> @@ -407,16 +383,11 @@ int xe_mmio_init(struct xe_device *xe)
> int xe_mmio_root_tile_init(struct xe_device *xe)
> {
> struct xe_tile *root_tile = xe_device_get_root_tile(xe);
> - int err;
>
> /* Setup first tile; other tiles (if present) will be setup later. */
> root_tile->mmio.size = SZ_16M;
> root_tile->mmio.regs = xe->mmio.regs;
>
> - err = xe_verify_lmem_ready(xe);
> - if (err)
> - return err;
> -
> return 0;
> }
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 40364 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-11 11:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-08 8:55 [PATCH 0/2] Pcode init status and lmem check Riana Tauro
2024-03-08 8:49 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-03-08 8:49 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 8:50 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 8:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] RFC drm/xe: check pcode init status only on root gt of root tile Riana Tauro
2024-03-08 14:37 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-03-11 5:11 ` Riana Tauro
2024-03-11 10:18 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-03-11 10:58 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-03-08 8:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] RFC drm/xe: re-order lmem init check and wait for initialization to complete Riana Tauro
2024-03-08 14:42 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-03-11 5:23 ` Riana Tauro
2024-03-11 14:40 ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-03-11 16:41 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-03-11 11:08 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad [this message]
2024-03-08 9:06 ` ✓ CI.Build: success for Pcode init status and lmem check Patchwork
2024-03-08 9:06 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 9:08 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 9:37 ` ✗ CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2024-03-08 12:59 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Pcode init status and lmem check (rev2) Patchwork
2024-03-08 13:00 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 13:01 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 13:11 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 13:12 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 13:13 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-03-08 13:45 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " 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=f144e5d4-46d3-41c4-a9eb-79eb62fd575c@intel.com \
--to=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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