[PATCH 1/2] drm/amdgpu: Set module parameter for emulation

[Liu, Shaoyun]

The changes I send out are try to minimize the emulation specific code , like the  ip_block_mask change , so developer can just change the  module parameter to enable the specific ip block during emulation. Otherwise we need a messy ifdef  to enable specific  ip block for the  specific ASIC to run on emulator .  The soc aisc init function will be basic specific and  will be added on developer works on that asic . 

Regards
Shaoyun.liu

-----Original Message-----
From: Bridgman, John 
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 3:37 PM
To: Alex Deucher; Koenig, Christian
Cc: amd-gfx list; Liu, Shaoyun
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] drm/amdgpu: Set module parameter for emulation

If it helps, my recollection was that Intel was also pushing some pre-silicon support code upstream.

Agree that if the changes get big/messy/invasive we should rethink this, but my impression is that the changes can be fairly small. There will be one Big Honkin' function that programs ~10,000 registers with some readback and delay logic specific to the emulator, but we can replace that with a stub and maybe move it to a separate file.

Christian, are you OK with upstreaming the ZFB patches ? We will be using those on both emulator and real silicon.

Thanks,
John

>-----Original Message-----
>From: amd-gfx [mailto:amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf 
>Of Alex Deucher
>Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 3:31 PM
>To: Koenig, Christian
>Cc: amd-gfx list; Liu, Shaoyun
>Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/amdgpu: Set module parameter for emulation
>
>On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Christian König 
><ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't think we should push any emulation specific code upstream.
>>
>> Nobody outside of AMD can test anything of that not actually make any 
>> use of it.
>
>It makes it much easier to maintain the code however and debug things 
>on the emulator in the future if we encounter an issue, even after we 
>get silicon back.  Some emulation features can even be used on real 
>silicon, although there is not much value in doing so.
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>
>> Am 01.02.2018 um 21:15 schrieb Shaoyun Liu:
>>>
>>> During emulation period, use the directly load for firmware also 
>>> only enable the GFX , SDMA and necessary common, gmc, ih IP block
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Shaoyun Liu <Shaoyun.Liu at amd.com>
>>>
>>> Change-Id: I325910fa06be4060725f404e471cc79daaf343c3
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c | 10 +++++++++-
>>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
>>> index 5a5ed47..7a1c670 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
>>> @@ -93,10 +93,18 @@
>>>   int amdgpu_msi = -1;
>>>   int amdgpu_lockup_timeout = 10000;
>>>   int amdgpu_dpm = -1;
>>> -int amdgpu_fw_load_type = -1;
>>>   int amdgpu_aspm = -1;
>>>   int amdgpu_runtime_pm = -1;
>>> +#ifndef AMDGPU_EMULATOR_BUILD
>>>   uint amdgpu_ip_block_mask = 0xffffffff;
>>> +int amdgpu_fw_load_type = -1;
>>> +#else
>>> +/* Only enable GFX and  SDMA + common, gmc, ih IP  block for 
>>> +emulation */ uint amdgpu_ip_block_mask = 0xc7;
>
>I'm not sure it's a good idea to hardcode the block mask in this case.
>We'll be changing it as we test additional blocks on the emulator.
>
>Alex
>
>>> +/* Normally, only direct load is support durign emulation time */ 
>>> +int amdgpu_fw_load_type = 0; #endif
>>> +
>>>   int amdgpu_bapm = -1;
>>>   int amdgpu_deep_color = 0;
>>>   int amdgpu_vm_size = -1;
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> amd-gfx mailing list
>> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
>_______________________________________________
>amd-gfx mailing list
>amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx