[PATCH] drm/amdgpu: cleanup SPM VMID update
Liu, Monk
Monk.Liu at amd.com
Tue Apr 21 13:52:48 UTC 2020
> What are you talking about? The bits control what is used in the MC interface, there is no increment or anything here.
My bad , it is RLC_SPM_PERF_CNTR not RLC_SPM_PERF_COUNTER, I though it as COUNTER
>>Agreed that sounds like a good idea to me as well no matter if we use RMW or just a write.
If we go NOKIQ way then we always use MMIO to update it, no RMW package at all
Besides RMW is not available in KCQ ring ...
Looks we have no choice !
_____________________________________
Monk Liu|GPU Virtualization Team |AMD
-----Original Message-----
From: Tao, Yintian <Yintian.Tao at amd.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 9:46 PM
To: Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig at amd.com>; Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>; He, Jacob <Jacob.He at amd.com>; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: cleanup SPM VMID update
Hi Christian
Great. Then can you modify the patch according to Monk's suggestion?
We need this patch for one important project.
Best Regards
Yintian Tao
-----Original Message-----
From: Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig at amd.com>
Sent: 2020年4月21日 21:38
To: Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>; Tao, Yintian <Yintian.Tao at amd.com>; He, Jacob <Jacob.He at amd.com>; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: cleanup SPM VMID update
> The problem is some fields are increased by hardware
What are you talking about? The bits control what is used in the MC interface, there is no increment or anything here.
> I think at least we should apply one change: we use NO_KIQ for SRIOV
> pp_one_vf_mode case to access this SPM register to avoid SRIOV KIQ
> flood
Agreed that sounds like a good idea to me as well no matter if we use RMW or just a write.
Regards,
Christian.
Am 21.04.20 um 15:34 schrieb Liu, Monk:
> The problem is some fields are increased by hardware, and RLC simply
> read its value, we cannot set those field together with VMID
>
> Christian, we should stop arguing on this small feature, there is no way to have a worse solution compared with current logic ....
>
> I think at least we should apply one change: we use NO_KIQ for SRIOV
> pp_one_vf_mode case to access this SPM register to avoid SRIOV KIQ
> flood
>
> _____________________________________
> Monk Liu|GPU Virtualization Team |AMD
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amd-gfx <amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of
> Christian K?nig
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:52 PM
> To: Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>; Koenig, Christian
> <Christian.Koenig at amd.com>; Tao, Yintian <Yintian.Tao at amd.com>; He,
> Jacob <Jacob.He at amd.com>; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Gu, Frans <Frans.Gu at amd.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: cleanup SPM VMID update
>
> Hi Monk,
>
> at least on Vega that should be fine. If the RLC should use anything else than 0 here we should update that together with the VMID.
>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
> Am 21.04.20 um 11:54 schrieb Liu, Monk:
>>>>> Could only be that the firmware updates the bits to something non default, I'm going to double check that on a Vega10.
>> I think that will be a sure answer, otherwise why we need those field if we always write 0 to them and reader always expect 0 reading back from them ??
>>
>> Those fields are kind of performance counters
>>
>> _____________________________________
>> Monk Liu|GPU Virtualization Team |AMD
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 5:52 PM
>> To: Tao, Yintian <Yintian.Tao at amd.com>; Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>;
>> He, Jacob <Jacob.He at amd.com>; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: Gu, Frans <Frans.Gu at amd.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: cleanup SPM VMID update
>>
>> Am 21.04.20 um 11:45 schrieb Tao, Yintian:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com>
>>> Sent: 2020年4月21日 17:10
>>> To: Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>; Tao, Yintian
>>> <Yintian.Tao at amd.com>; He, Jacob <Jacob.He at amd.com>;
>>> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>>> Cc: Gu, Frans <Frans.Gu at amd.com>
>>> Subject: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: cleanup SPM VMID update
>>>
>>> The RLC SPM configuration register contains the information how the memory access is made (VMID, MTYPE, etc....) which should always be consistent.
>>>
>>> So instead of a read modify write cycle of the VMID always update the whole register.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 7 +------ drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v7_0.c | 7 +------ drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c | 7 +------ drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c | 7 +------
>>> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c
>>> index 0a03e2ad5d95..2a6556371046 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c
>>> @@ -7030,12 +7030,7 @@ static int
>>> gfx_v10_0_update_gfx_clock_gating(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>>>
>>> static void gfx_v10_0_update_spm_vmid(struct amdgpu_device *adev, unsigned vmid) {
>>> - u32 data;
>>> -
>>> - data = RREG32_SOC15(GC, 0, mmRLC_SPM_MC_CNTL);
>>> -
>>> - data &= ~RLC_SPM_MC_CNTL__RLC_SPM_VMID_MASK;
>>> - data |= (vmid & RLC_SPM_MC_CNTL__RLC_SPM_VMID_MASK) << RLC_SPM_MC_CNTL__RLC_SPM_VMID__SHIFT;
>>> + u32 data = REG_SET_FIELD(0, RLC_SPM_MC_CNTL, RLC_SPM_VMID, vmid);
>>> [yttao]: The orig_val is 0 which means except VMID field other reset fields will be set to 0. Whether it is legal?
>> According to the register specification that is the default value for those bits on gfx9/10.
>>
>> Could only be that the firmware updates the bits to something non default, I'm going to double check that on a Vega10.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>> WREG32_SOC15(GC, 0, mmRLC_SPM_MC_CNTL, data); } diff --git
>>> a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v7_0.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v7_0.c
>>> index b2f10e39eff1..a92486cd038f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v7_0.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v7_0.c
>>> @@ -3570,12 +3570,7 @@ static int gfx_v7_0_rlc_resume(struct
>>> amdgpu_device *adev)
>>>
>>> static void gfx_v7_0_update_spm_vmid(struct amdgpu_device *adev, unsigned vmid) {
>>> - u32 data;
>>> -
>>> - data = RREG32(mmRLC_SPM_VMID);
>>> -
>>> - data &= ~RLC_SPM_VMID__RLC_SPM_VMID_MASK;
>>> - data |= (vmid & RLC_SPM_VMID__RLC_SPM_VMID_MASK) << RLC_SPM_VMID__RLC_SPM_VMID__SHIFT;
>>> + u32 data = REG_SET_FIELD(0, RLC_SPM_VMID, RLC_SPM_VMID, vmid);
>>>
>>> WREG32(mmRLC_SPM_VMID, data);
>>> }
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
>>> index fc6c2f2bc76c..44fdda68db98 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
>>> @@ -5613,12 +5613,7 @@ static void gfx_v8_0_unset_safe_mode(struct
>>> amdgpu_device *adev)
>>>
>>> static void gfx_v8_0_update_spm_vmid(struct amdgpu_device *adev, unsigned vmid) {
>>> - u32 data;
>>> -
>>> - data = RREG32(mmRLC_SPM_VMID);
>>> -
>>> - data &= ~RLC_SPM_VMID__RLC_SPM_VMID_MASK;
>>> - data |= (vmid & RLC_SPM_VMID__RLC_SPM_VMID_MASK) << RLC_SPM_VMID__RLC_SPM_VMID__SHIFT;
>>> + u32 data = REG_SET_FIELD(0, RLC_SPM_VMID, RLC_SPM_VMID, vmid);
>>>
>>> WREG32(mmRLC_SPM_VMID, data);
>>> }
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
>>> index 54eded9a6ac5..b36fbf991313 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
>>> @@ -4950,12 +4950,7 @@ static int
>>> gfx_v9_0_update_gfx_clock_gating(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>>>
>>> static void gfx_v9_0_update_spm_vmid(struct amdgpu_device *adev, unsigned vmid) {
>>> - u32 data;
>>> -
>>> - data = RREG32_SOC15(GC, 0, mmRLC_SPM_MC_CNTL);
>>> -
>>> - data &= ~RLC_SPM_MC_CNTL__RLC_SPM_VMID_MASK;
>>> - data |= (vmid & RLC_SPM_MC_CNTL__RLC_SPM_VMID_MASK) << RLC_SPM_MC_CNTL__RLC_SPM_VMID__SHIFT;
>>> + u32 data = REG_SET_FIELD(0, RLC_SPM_MC_CNTL, RLC_SPM_VMID, vmid);
>>>
>>> WREG32_SOC15(GC, 0, mmRLC_SPM_MC_CNTL, data); }
>>> --
>>> 2.17.1
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> amd-gfx mailing list
>> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flis
>> t
>> s.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Famd-gfx&data=02%7C01%7Cm
>> o
>> nk.liu%40amd.com%7C2efa2541a56f4716b9bd08d7e5ea630d%7C3dd8961fe4884e6
>> 0
>> 8e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637230667158960812&sdata=uoHIufAtSFzCf
>> 4
>> P8VpxwBi0%2ByddIa0QVw32W3ZCJAmk%3D&reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> amd-gfx mailing list
> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flist
> s.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Famd-gfx&data=02%7C01%7Cmo
> nk.liu%40amd.com%7C2efa2541a56f4716b9bd08d7e5ea630d%7C3dd8961fe4884e60
> 8e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637230667158960812&sdata=uoHIufAtSFzCf4
> P8VpxwBi0%2ByddIa0QVw32W3ZCJAmk%3D&reserved=0
More information about the amd-gfx
mailing list