[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/huc: Update the construction of file path for HuC similar to that of GuC

[Srivatsa, Anusha]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mcgee, Jeff
>Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 11:22 AM
>To: Srivatsa, Anusha <anusha.srivatsa at intel.com>
>Cc: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/huc: Update the construction of file path for HuC
>similar to that of GuC
>
>On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 03:24:53PM -0700, Anusha Srivatsa wrote:
>> Update the file construction and specifying the required version
>> similar to that of GuC.Add an extra field for the build number.
>> Adopted the approach used in
>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/104355/ <Tvrtko Ursulin>
>>
>> Cc: Jeff Mcgee <jeff.mcgee at intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa at intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc_loader.c | 25
>> +++++++++++++++++++------
>>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc_loader.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc_loader.c
>> index 2f5d9d9..419caae 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc_loader.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc_loader.c
>> @@ -39,11 +39,24 @@
>>   *
>>   * Note that HuC firmware loading must be done before GuC loading.
>>   */
>> +#define SKL_FW_MAJOR 01
>> +#define SKL_FW_MINOR 07
>> +#define SKL_BLD_NUM 1398
>>
>> -#define I915_SKL_HUC_UCODE "i915/skl_huc_ver01_07_1398.bin"
>> +#define BXT_FW_MAJOR 01
>> +#define BXT_FW_MINOR 07
>> +#define BXT_BLD_NUM 1398
>> +
>> +#define HUC_FW_PATH(platform, major, minor, bld_num) \
>> +	"i915/" __stringify(platform) "_huc_ver" __stringify(major) "_" \
>> +	__stringify(minor) "_" __stringify(bld_num) ".bin"
>> +
>> +#define I915_SKL_HUC_UCODE HUC_FW_PATH(skl, SKL_FW_MAJOR, \
>> +	SKL_FW_MINOR, SKL_BLD_NUM)
>>  MODULE_FIRMWARE(I915_SKL_HUC_UCODE);
>>
>> -#define I915_BXT_HUC_UCODE "i915/bxt_huc_ver01_07_1398.bin"
>> +#define I915_BXT_HUC_UCODE HUC_FW_PATH(bxt, BXT_FW_MAJOR, \
>> +	BXT_FW_MINOR, BXT_BLD_NUM)
>>  MODULE_FIRMWARE(I915_BXT_HUC_UCODE);
>>
>>  /**
>> @@ -151,12 +164,12 @@ void intel_huc_init(struct drm_device *dev)
>>
>>  	if (IS_SKYLAKE(dev_priv)) {
>>  		fw_path = I915_SKL_HUC_UCODE;
>> -		huc_fw->major_ver_wanted = 1;
>> -		huc_fw->minor_ver_wanted = 7;
>> +		huc_fw->major_ver_wanted = SKL_FW_MAJOR;
>> +		huc_fw->minor_ver_wanted = SKL_FW_MINOR;
>>  	} else if (IS_BROXTON(dev_priv)) {
>>  		fw_path = I915_BXT_HUC_UCODE;
>> -		huc_fw->major_ver_wanted = 1;
>> -		huc_fw->minor_ver_wanted = 7;
>> +		huc_fw->major_ver_wanted = BXT_FW_MAJOR;
>> +		huc_fw->minor_ver_wanted = BXT_FW_MINOR;
>>  	}
>>
>>  	if (fw_path == NULL)
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
>
>Looks good but it would be far better to make these changes in the
>corresponding patches within the origin HuC patch set, rather than
>proposing a follow-up patch to correct issues in that set (which is
>not yet merged and can be updated).

Agreed. Thankyou for the review.

>-Jeff