[Nouveau] [PATCH 0/2] drm/nouveau: Two more fixes

[Thierry Reding]

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 04:07:54PM +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 00:36, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com>
> >
> > Hi Ben,
> >
> > I messed up the ordering of patches in my tree a bit, so these two fixes
> > got separated from the others. I don't consider these particularily
> > urgent because the crash that the first one fixes only happens on gp10b
> > which we don't enable by default yet and the second patch fixes a crash
> > that only happens on module unload (or driver unbind, more accurately),
> > which isn't a terribly common thing to do.
> >
> > I'll be sending out fixes shortly to make the GP10B work more properly
> > on a wider range of Jetson TX2 devices and enable it by default.
> >
> > One thing to mention is that I'm not exactly sure if the first patch is
> > the right thing to do. I haven't seen any issues after that change, but
> > I'm also not exactly sure I understand what BAR2 is used for, so I don't
> > know if I would've even covered those code paths (other than the one
> > causing the crash at probe time) in my tests.
> BAR2 on dGPUs is used to map kernel-level GPU objects in VRAM so they
> can be accessed by the driver.  It's pretty much a smaller version of
> BAR1, but intended for a different purpose.
> 
> On dGPUs, there's a couple of places (fault buffer address, and fault
> method buffer on volta) where the GPU wants PRI regs to be poked with
> an offset within BAR2 rather than an aperture+offset combination.  I'm
> not 100% sure what Tegra parts do here, but presumably if it's working
> for you, they're happy to just accept a system memory address instead.
> 
> I guess this would be the right thing to do here in that situation.
> The more obvious (from a "reading the code" POV) thing to do would be
> to write Tegra-specific versions of the functions that use
> nvkm_memory_bar2() to perform this mapping, and use nvkm_memory_addr()
> instead but I'm not sure if we need/want to go to that effort.  It's
> conceivable it could be required at some point.

Yeah, that sounds slightly more correct. I'll look into it and see if I
can come up with something.

Thierry

> 
> Ben.
> 
> >
> > It'd be great to get Lyude's feedback on the second patch, since that
> > call to pci_disable_device() was rather oddly placed and I'm not sure if
> > that was essential for things to work or whether the slightly different
> > point in time where it's called after this patch is also okay. It looks
> > to me like it should work fine, but I don't currently have a way to test
> > this on desktop GPUs.
> >
> > Thierry
> >
> > Thierry Reding (2):
> >   drm/nouveau: tegra: Fix NULL pointer dereference
> >   drm/nouveau: tegra: Do not try to disable PCI device
> >
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c         |  3 +-
> >  .../drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/instmem/gk20a.c   | 30 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > --
> > 2.23.0
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nouveau mailing list
> > Nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20190917/391e84e7/attachment.sig>