drm/amdkfd: Add support for VI in DQM

[Oded Gabbay]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter at oracle.com> wrote:
> Hello Ben Goz,
>
> The patch 914bea6329b2: "drm/amdkfd: Add support for VI in DQM" from
> Jan 12, 2015, leads to the following static checker warning:
>
>         drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device_queue_manager_vi.c:158 init_sdma_vm()
>         warn: should this be a bitwise op?
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device_queue_manager_vi.c
>    148  static void init_sdma_vm(struct device_queue_manager *dqm, struct queue *q,
>    149                                  struct qcm_process_device *qpd)
>    150  {
>    151          uint32_t value = (1 << SDMA0_RLC0_VIRTUAL_ADDR__ATC__SHIFT);
>    152
>    153          if (q->process->is_32bit_user_mode)
>    154                  value |= (1 << SDMA0_RLC0_VIRTUAL_ADDR__PTR32__SHIFT) |
>    155                                  get_sh_mem_bases_32(qpd_to_pdd(qpd));
>    156          else
>    157                  value |= ((get_sh_mem_bases_nybble_64(qpd_to_pdd(qpd))) <<
>    158                                  SDMA0_RLC0_VIRTUAL_ADDR__SHARED_BASE__SHIFT) &&
>                                                                                      ^^
> Probably logical AND was intended.
>
>    159                                  SDMA0_RLC0_VIRTUAL_ADDR__SHARED_BASE_MASK;
>    160
>    161          q->properties.sdma_vm_addr = value;
>    162  }
>
> Also:
>
>         drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device_queue_manager_cik.c:146
>         init_sdma_vm() warn: should this be a bitwise op?
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device_queue_manager_cik.c
>    136  static void init_sdma_vm(struct device_queue_manager *dqm, struct queue *q,
>    137                                  struct qcm_process_device *qpd)
>    138  {
>    139          uint32_t value = (1 << SDMA0_RLC0_VIRTUAL_ADDR__ATC__SHIFT);
>    140
>    141          if (q->process->is_32bit_user_mode)
>    142                  value |= (1 << SDMA0_RLC0_VIRTUAL_ADDR__PTR32__SHIFT) |
>    143                                  get_sh_mem_bases_32(qpd_to_pdd(qpd));
>    144          else
>    145                  value |= ((get_sh_mem_bases_nybble_64(qpd_to_pdd(qpd))) <<
>    146                                  SDMA0_RLC0_VIRTUAL_ADDR__SHARED_BASE__SHIFT) &&
>                                                                                      ^
>    147                                  SDMA0_RLC0_VIRTUAL_ADDR__SHARED_BASE_MASK;
>    148
>    149          q->properties.sdma_vm_addr = value;
>    150  }
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Thanks again for catching that.
Indeed, the AND operation should be bitwise AND, not logical AND.
I will send a patch shortly.

   Oded