Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@intel.com>,
	Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>,
	"Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe/guc: Don't support older GuC 70.x releases
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 03:06:59 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ff14df57-690b-46bc-986e-90b428cd694c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dw54uqzedkjsbhoiadem4lzjhuwpud7m7njenel7tfbc5fuxwm@latczhpxzijn>



On 3/4/2024 8:38 AM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 08:26:16AM -0800, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
>> Supporting older GuC versions comes with baggage, both on the coding
>> side (due to interfaces only being available from a certain version
>> onwards) and on the testing side (due to having to make sure the driver
>> works as expected with older GuCs).
>> Since all of our Xe platform are still under force probe, we haven't
>> committed to support any specific GuC version and we therefore don't
>> need to support the older once, which means that we can force a bottom
>> limit to what GuC we accept. This allows us to remove any conditional
>> statements based on older GuC versions and also to approach newer
>> additions knowing that we'll never attempt to load something older
>> than our minimum requirement.
>>
>> As an initial value, the minimum expected version is set to 70.19,
>> which is the version currently in the firmware table, but the
>> expectation is that this will be bumbed every time we update the
>> table, until we remove the force probe.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
>> Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
>> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
>> Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
>> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c   | 14 ++------------
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_uc_fw.c | 36 ++++++++++++++---------------------
>> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c
>> index 0d2a2dd13f11..ba2ca6895917 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c
>> @@ -133,15 +133,10 @@ static u32 guc_ctl_ads_flags(struct xe_guc *guc)
>>     return flags;
>> }
>>
>> -#define GUC_VER(maj, min, pat)    (((maj) << 16) | ((min) << 8) | 
>> (pat))
>> -
>> static u32 guc_ctl_wa_flags(struct xe_guc *guc)
>> {
>>     struct xe_device *xe = guc_to_xe(guc);
>>     struct xe_gt *gt = guc_to_gt(guc);
>> -    struct xe_uc_fw *uc_fw = &guc->fw;
>> -    struct xe_uc_fw_version *version = 
>> &uc_fw->versions.found[XE_UC_FW_VER_RELEASE];
>> -
>>     u32 flags = 0;
>>
>>     if (XE_WA(gt, 22012773006))
>> @@ -171,13 +166,8 @@ static u32 guc_ctl_wa_flags(struct xe_guc *guc)
>>     if (XE_WA(gt, 1509372804))
>>         flags |= GUC_WA_RENDER_RST_RC6_EXIT;
>>
>> -    if (XE_WA(gt, 14018913170)) {
>> -        if (GUC_VER(version->major, version->minor, version->patch) 
>> >= GUC_VER(70, 7, 0))
>> -            flags |= GUC_WA_ENABLE_TSC_CHECK_ON_RC6;
>> -        else
>> -            drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "Skip WA 14018913170: GUC version 
>> expected >= 70.7.0, found %u.%u.%u\n",
>> -                version->major, version->minor, version->patch);
>> -    }
>> +    if (XE_WA(gt, 14018913170))
>> +        flags |= GUC_WA_ENABLE_TSC_CHECK_ON_RC6;
>>
>>     return flags;
>> }
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_uc_fw.c 
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_uc_fw.c
>> index 7751d6ba6ce0..fa06b57d2af5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_uc_fw.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_uc_fw.c
>> @@ -297,36 +297,28 @@ static void uc_fw_fini(struct drm_device *drm, 
>> void *arg)
>>     xe_uc_fw_change_status(uc_fw, XE_UC_FIRMWARE_SELECTED);
>> }
>>
>> -static void guc_read_css_info(struct xe_uc_fw *uc_fw, struct 
>> uc_css_header *css)
>> +static int guc_read_css_info(struct xe_uc_fw *uc_fw, struct 
>> uc_css_header *css)
>> {
>>     struct xe_gt *gt = uc_fw_to_gt(uc_fw);
>>     struct xe_uc_fw_version *release = 
>> &uc_fw->versions.found[XE_UC_FW_VER_RELEASE];
>>     struct xe_uc_fw_version *compatibility = 
>> &uc_fw->versions.found[XE_UC_FW_VER_COMPATIBILITY];
>>
>>     xe_gt_assert(gt, uc_fw->type == XE_UC_FW_TYPE_GUC);
>> -    xe_gt_assert(gt, release->major >= 70);
>> -
>> -    if (release->major > 70 || release->minor >= 6) {
>> -        /* v70.6.0 adds CSS header support */
>> -        compatibility->major = FIELD_GET(CSS_SW_VERSION_UC_MAJOR,
>> -                         css->submission_version);
>> -        compatibility->minor = FIELD_GET(CSS_SW_VERSION_UC_MINOR,
>> -                         css->submission_version);
>> -        compatibility->patch = FIELD_GET(CSS_SW_VERSION_UC_PATCH,
>> -                         css->submission_version);
>> -    } else if (release->minor >= 3) {
>> -        /* v70.3.0 introduced v1.1.0 */
>> -        compatibility->major = 1;
>> -        compatibility->minor = 1;
>> -        compatibility->patch = 0;
>> -    } else {
>> -        /* v70.0.0 introduced v1.0.0 */
>> -        compatibility->major = 1;
>> -        compatibility->minor = 0;
>> -        compatibility->patch = 0;
>> +
>> +    /* We don't support GuC releases older than 70.19 */
>> +    if (release->major < 70 || (release->major == 70 && 
>> release->minor < 19)) {
>
> there's slight chance of this getting out of sync with the firmware 
> versions we
> define. What about adding a define with minimum version just above
> XE_GUC_FIRMWARE_DEFS ?

I thought about that, but I was worried that'd make it easier to 
accidentally update it after the force_probe has been removed, while 
updating it here would have to be more deliberate. I guess I could put a 
big warning comment above the define for safety.

John, as the one who most often does the GuC updates, any preference here?

>
> Anyway,
>
> Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
>
> for this patch or to carry over to a v2.
>

Thanks!
Daniele

> thanks
> Lucas De Marchi


  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-06 11:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-04 16:26 [PATCH] drm/xe/guc: Don't support older GuC 70.x releases Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-03-04 16:31 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-03-04 16:32 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-03-04 16:33 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-03-04 16:38 ` [PATCH] " Lucas De Marchi
2024-03-06 11:06   ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio [this message]
2024-03-15 18:37     ` John Harrison
2024-03-19 19:10       ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-03-04 16:49 ` ✓ CI.Build: success for " Patchwork
2024-03-04 16:49 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-03-04 16:50 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-03-04 17:16 ` ✗ CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2024-03-14 16:48 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe/guc: Don't support older GuC 70.x releases (rev2) Patchwork
2024-03-14 16:49 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-03-14 16:49 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-03-14 17:00 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-03-14 17:03 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-03-14 17:04 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-03-14 17:31 ` ✓ 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=ff14df57-690b-46bc-986e-90b428cd694c@intel.com \
    --to=daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com \
    --cc=John.C.Harrison@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@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