[PATCH v4 1/5] drm/msm/adreno: Implement SMEM-based speed bin

[Konrad Dybcio]

On 28.06.2024 7:31 PM, Elliot Berman wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 10:24:52AM -0700, Elliot Berman wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 08:28:06PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> On recent (SM8550+) Snapdragon platforms, the GPU speed bin data is
>>> abstracted through SMEM, instead of being directly available in a fuse.
>>>
>>> Add support for SMEM-based speed binning, which includes getting
>>> "feature code" and "product code" from said source and parsing them
>>> to form something that lets us match OPPs against.
>>>
>>> Due to the product code being ignored in the context of Adreno on
>>> production parts (as of SM8650), hardcode it to SOCINFO_PC_UNKNOWN.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio at linaro.org>
>>> ---

[...]

>>> +	ret = qcom_smem_get_feature_code(&fcode);
>>> +	if (!ret)
>>> +		*fuse = ADRENO_SKU_ID(fcode);
>>> +	else if (ret != -EOPNOTSUPP)
>>> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Couldn't get feature code from SMEM\n");
>>
>> Probably want to update a6xx_set_supported_hw() error handling to ignore
>> -EOPNOTSUPP or do:
>>
>> 	else /* ret == -EOPNOTSUPP */
>> 		return -ENOENT;
>>
>>
>>
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> +	return 0;
>>
>> I noticed that if SMEM isn't enabled and nvmem returns -ENOENT, we still
>> return 0. That could lead to uninitialized access of speedbin in both
>> users of adreno_read_speedbin(). Maybe:
>>
>> 	return ret;
>>
> 
> Ah, I see patch 4 in the series now, but I wonder if we can do something
> better so that this patch works without relying on later patch in
> series?

Looks like rebase mess on my side :/

Rob already picked this up for next.. Guess we could ask really nicely for
a forcepush there?

Konrad