[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 2/2] drm/i915/vlv: WA to fix Voltage not getting dropped to Vmin when Gfx is power gated.
S, Deepak
deepak.s at intel.com
Wed Jan 29 05:39:21 CET 2014
On 1/29/2014 1:03 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 08:02:56PM +0530, S, Deepak wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1/27/2014 10:22 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 09:35:06PM +0530, deepak.s at intel.com wrote:
>>>> From: Deepak S <deepak.s at intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> When we enter RC6 and GFX Clocks are off, the voltage remains higher
>>>> than Vmin. When we try to set the freq to RPn, it might fail since the
>>>> Gfx clocks are down. So to fix this in Gfx idle, Bring the GFX clock up
>>>> and set the freq to RPn then move GFx down.
>>>>
>>>> v2: remove vlv_update_rps_cur_delay function. Update commit message (Daniel)
>>>>
>>>> v3: Fix the timeout during wait for gfx clock (Jesse)
>>>>
>>>> v4: addressed comments on set freq and punit wait (Ville)
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Deepak S <deepak.s at intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 4 ++++
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>> 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
>>>> index 242f540..feaa83b 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
>>>> @@ -4944,6 +4944,10 @@
>>>> GEN6_PM_RP_DOWN_THRESHOLD | \
>>>> GEN6_PM_RP_DOWN_TIMEOUT)
>>>>
>>>> +#define VLV_GTLC_SURVIVABILITY_REG 0x130098
>>>> +#define VLV_GFX_CLK_STATUS_BIT (1<<3)
>>>> +#define VLV_GFX_CLK_FORCE_ON_BIT (1<<2)
>>>> +
>>>> #define GEN6_GT_GFX_RC6_LOCKED 0x138104
>>>> #define VLV_COUNTER_CONTROL 0x138104
>>>> #define VLV_COUNT_RANGE_HIGH (1<<15)
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>>>> index c6a07c9..84e20d0 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>>>> @@ -3035,6 +3035,56 @@ void gen6_set_rps(struct drm_device *dev, u8 val)
>>>> trace_intel_gpu_freq_change(val * 50);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +/* vlv_set_rps_idle: Set the frequency to Rpn if Gfx clocks are down
>>>> + *
>>>> + * * If Gfx is Idle, then
>>>> + * 1. Mask Turbo interrupts
>>>> + * 2. Bring up Gfx clock
>>>> + * 3. Change the freq to Rpn and wait till P-Unit updates freq
>>>> + * 4. Clear the Force GFX CLK ON bit so that Gfx can down
>>>> + * 5. Unmask Turbo interrupts
>>>> +*/
>>>> +static void vlv_set_rps_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>>> +{
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * When we are idle. Drop to min voltage state.
>>>> + */
>>>> +
>>>> + if (dev_priv->rps.cur_delay <= dev_priv->rps.min_delay)
>>>> + return;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Mask turbo interrupt so that they will not come in between */
>>>> + I915_WRITE(GEN6_PMINTRMSK, 0xffffffff);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Bring up the Gfx clock */
>>>> + I915_WRITE(VLV_GTLC_SURVIVABILITY_REG,
>>>> + I915_READ(VLV_GTLC_SURVIVABILITY_REG) |
>>>> + VLV_GFX_CLK_FORCE_ON_BIT);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (wait_for_atomic(((VLV_GFX_CLK_STATUS_BIT &
>>>
>>> Do we really need an atomic register busy loop here? Afaics this is only
>>> called from process context, so the normal wait_for macro should be good
>>> enough ...
>>> -Daniel
>> I agree, the reason why i did the _atomic as we observed delay in
>> scheduling the wait_for and we ended up spending lot of time here.
>> I will wait for other comments, If i dont get any, I will address
>> this comment and submit the patch.
>
> Now that we're using Chris' idle-clamping rps logic this would be run from
> a work queue. So I hope that the potential scheduling delays here won't
> affect things badly. If it does you can stick with the _atomic, but then
> it needs a comment.
>
> But I really hope that we only call this from worker threads, so shouldn't
> matter too badly if there's a bit a scheduler delay.
> -Daniel
I verified and we don't have a scheduling delays, I will change this to
_atomic to wait_for
-Deepak
>>
>>>> + I915_READ(VLV_GTLC_SURVIVABILITY_REG)) != 0), 5)) {
>>>> + DRM_ERROR("GFX_CLK_ON request timed out\n");
>>>> + return;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + vlv_punit_write(dev_priv, PUNIT_REG_GPU_FREQ_REQ, dev_priv->rps.min_delay);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (wait_for_atomic(((vlv_punit_read(dev_priv, PUNIT_REG_GPU_FREQ_STS))
>>>> + & GENFREQSTATUS) == 0, 5))
>>>> + DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("timed out waiting for Punit\n");
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Release the Gfx clock */
>>>> + I915_WRITE(VLV_GTLC_SURVIVABILITY_REG,
>>>> + I915_READ(VLV_GTLC_SURVIVABILITY_REG) &
>>>> + ~VLV_GFX_CLK_FORCE_ON_BIT);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Unmask Turbo interrupts */
>>>> + I915_WRITE(GEN6_PMINTRMSK, ~(GEN6_PM_RPS_EVENTS |
>>>> + GEN6_PM_RP_UP_EI_EXPIRED));
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +
>>>> +
>>>> void gen6_rps_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>>> {
>>>> struct drm_device *dev = dev_priv->dev;
>>>> @@ -3042,7 +3092,7 @@ void gen6_rps_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>>> mutex_lock(&dev_priv->rps.hw_lock);
>>>> if (dev_priv->rps.enabled) {
>>>> if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev))
>>>> - valleyview_set_rps(dev_priv->dev, dev_priv->rps.min_delay);
>>>> + vlv_set_rps_idle(dev_priv);
>>>> else
>>>> gen6_set_rps(dev_priv->dev, dev_priv->rps.min_delay);
>>>> dev_priv->rps.last_adj = 0;
>>>> @@ -4273,6 +4323,7 @@ void intel_gpu_ips_teardown(void)
>>>> i915_mch_dev = NULL;
>>>> spin_unlock_irq(&mchdev_lock);
>>>> }
>>>> +
>>>> static void intel_init_emon(struct drm_device *dev)
>>>> {
>>>> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
>>>> --
>>>> 1.8.5.2
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Intel-gfx mailing list
>>>> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
>>>
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list