[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 2/6] drm/i915/guc : Removing i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading module parameter
Sujaritha
sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com
Thu Nov 2 16:34:25 UTC 2017
On 10/25/2017 08:26 AM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 19:21:21 +0200, Sujaritha Sundaresan
> <sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com> wrote:
>
>> We currently have two module parameters that control GuC:
>> "enable_guc_loading" and "enable_guc_submission". Whenever
>> we need submission=1, we also need loading=1.We also need
>> loading=1 when we want to want to verify the HuC, which
>> is every time we have a HuC (but all platforms with HuC
>> have a GuC and viceversa).
>>
>> Also if we have HuC have firmware to be loaded, we need to
>> have GuC to actually load it. So if the user wants to avoid
>> the GuC from getting loaded, they must not have a HuC
>> firmware to be loaded, in addition to not using submission.
>
> Hmm, I'm not sure that removal of HuC firmware file is the best
> way for the user to stop undesired GuC loading.
>
> I know that we want to minimize number of modparams, but maybe
> new i915.enable_huc=auto(-1)|never(0)|if available(1)|required(2)
> will solve here ...
>
> Alternatively we can replace both existing modparams with single:
>
> i915.enable_guc = off(0) | auto(1) | submission(2) | huc(4)
>
> then we could cover almost all cases:
>
> 0 = GuC loading disabled (no GuC submission, no HuC)
> 1 = GuC loading auto
> 2 = GuC loading enabled, GuC submission required, HuC disabled
> 3 = GuC loading enabled, GuC submission enabled, HuC disabled
> 4 = GuC loading enabled, GuC submission disabled, HuC required
> 5 = GuC loading enabled, GuC submission disabled, HuC enabled
> 6 = GuC loading enabled, GuC submission required, HuC required
> 7 = GuC loading enabled, GuC submission enabled, HuC enabled
This is a really good idea. I will include the new modparams in the next
revision.
>
>
>>
>> v2: Clarifying the commit message (Anusha)
>>
>> v3: Unify seq_puts messages, Re-factoring code as per review (Michal)
>>
>> v4: Rebase
>>
>> v5: Separating message unification into a separate patch
>>
>> v6: Re-factoring code (Sagar, Michal)
>> Rebase
>>
>> v7: Applying review comments (Sagar)
>> Rebase
>>
>> v8: Change to NEEDS_GUC_FW (Chris)
>> Applying review comments (Michal)
>> Clarifying commit message (Joonas)
>>
>> Suggested by: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo at intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com>
>> Cc: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa at intel.com>
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko at intel.com>
>> Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo at intel.com>
>> Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble at intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 9 +++--
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c | 4 ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h | 1 -
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c | 57
>> +++++++++++++++------------------
>> 8 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>> index 8edd029..25c47a0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>> @@ -2465,7 +2465,7 @@ static bool check_guc_submission(struct
>> seq_file *m)
>> if (!guc->execbuf_client) {
>> seq_printf(m, "GuC submission %s\n",
>> - HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv) ?
>> + HAS_GUC(dev_priv) ?
>> "disabled" :
>> "not supported");
>
> As I already said before, there is also 3rd possible status "failed"
>
> !HAS_GUC(dev_priv) ? "not supported" :
> !HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv) ? "disabled" :
> "failed"
>
> where HAS_GUC_SCHED is
>
> #define HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv) \
> (HAS_GUC(dev_priv) && i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission)
>
> or something similar
>
Sorry, I missed the third case. I will include it and the change to the
macro condition
in the next revision.
>> return false;
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> index f01c800..ede5004 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> @@ -3205,9 +3205,11 @@ static inline unsigned int
>> i915_sg_segment_size(void)
>> */
>> #define HAS_GUC(dev_priv) ((dev_priv)->info.has_guc)
>> #define HAS_GUC_CT(dev_priv) ((dev_priv)->info.has_guc_ct)
>> -#define HAS_GUC_UCODE(dev_priv) (HAS_GUC(dev_priv))
>> -#define HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv) (HAS_GUC(dev_priv))
>> -#define HAS_HUC_UCODE(dev_priv) (HAS_GUC(dev_priv))
>> +#define HAS_GUC_UCODE(dev_priv) ((dev_priv)->guc.fw.path != NULL)
>> +#define HAS_HUC_UCODE(dev_priv) ((dev_priv)->huc.fw.path != NULL)
>> +
>> +#define NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv) \
>
> Hmm, based on its usage, this name is now little confusing.
> Maybe USES_GUC ? See USES_PPGTT|USES_FULL_PPGTT|USES_FULL_48BIT_PPGTT
>
I would really prefer to keep NEEDS_GUC_FW
>> + (HAS_GUC(dev_priv) && \
>> + (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission ||
>> HAS_HUC_UCODE(dev_priv)))
>
> While unlikely, above will be true even with guc.fw.path == NULL
>
> Also, based on your statement "all platforms with HuC have a GuC
> and viceversa" I would assume that corresponding firmwares will
> be delivered also in pairs (except short enabling periods).
>
> Thus on every platform with has_guc=1 there will be guc.fw.path != NULL
> and huc.fw.path != NULL, effectively making this macro almost the
> same as HAS_GUC (as other cases are just error cases).
>
> If we want to make GuC loading conditional, we should use better
> condition ;)
>
Yes, I will improve the condition.
>
>> #define HAS_RESOURCE_STREAMER(dev_priv)
>> ((dev_priv)->info.has_resource_streamer)
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c
>> index 5bf96a2..4f0692e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c
>> @@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ static u32 default_desc_template(const struct
>> drm_i915_private *i915,
>> * present or not in use we still need a small bias as ring
>> wraparound
>> * at offset 0 sometimes hangs. No idea why.
>> */
>> - if (HAS_GUC(dev_priv) && i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading)
>> + if (NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv))
>> ctx->ggtt_offset_bias = GUC_WOPCM_TOP;
>> else
>> ctx->ggtt_offset_bias = I915_GTT_PAGE_SIZE;
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
>> index 527a2d2..9d78233 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
>> @@ -3481,7 +3481,7 @@ int i915_ggtt_probe_hw(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv)
>> * currently don't have any bits spare to pass in this upper
>> * restriction!
>> */
>> - if (HAS_GUC(dev_priv) && i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading) {
>> + if (NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv)) {
>> ggtt->base.total = min_t(u64, ggtt->base.total, GUC_GGTT_TOP);
>> ggtt->mappable_end = min(ggtt->mappable_end, ggtt->base.total);
>> }
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>> index b1296a5..ec76aac 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>> @@ -4026,7 +4026,7 @@ void intel_irq_init(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv)
>> for (i = 0; i < MAX_L3_SLICES; ++i)
>> dev_priv->l3_parity.remap_info[i] = NULL;
>> - if (HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv))
>> + if (HAS_GUC(dev_priv))
>> dev_priv->pm_guc_events = GEN9_GUC_TO_HOST_INT_EVENT;
>> /* Let's track the enabled rps events */
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c
>> index b4faeb6..1c25f45 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c
>> @@ -162,10 +162,6 @@ struct i915_params i915_modparams __read_mostly = {
>> "(0=use value from vbt [default], 1=low power swing(200mV),"
>> "2=default swing(400mV))");
>> -i915_param_named_unsafe(enable_guc_loading, int, 0400,
>> - "Enable GuC firmware loading "
>> - "(-1=auto, 0=never [default], 1=if available, 2=required)");
>> -
>> i915_param_named_unsafe(enable_guc_submission, int, 0400,
>> "Enable GuC submission "
>> "(-1=auto, 0=never [default], 1=if available, 2=required)");
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h
>> index c729226..9e1e231 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h
>> @@ -44,7 +44,6 @@
>> param(int, disable_power_well, -1) \
>> param(int, enable_ips, 1) \
>> param(int, invert_brightness, 0) \
>> - param(int, enable_guc_loading, 0) \
>> param(int, enable_guc_submission, 0) \
>> param(int, guc_log_level, -1) \
>> param(char *, guc_firmware_path, NULL) \
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
>> index 25bd162..9369ade 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
>> @@ -49,36 +49,35 @@ static int __intel_uc_reset_hw(struct
>> drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>> void intel_uc_sanitize_options(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>> {
>> + /* Verify Hardware support */
>> if (!HAS_GUC(dev_priv)) {
>> - if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading > 0 ||
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission > 0)
>> - DRM_INFO("Ignoring GuC options, no hardware\n");
>> -
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading = 0;
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = 0;
>> + if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission > 0)
>> + DRM_INFO("Ignoring option %s - no hardware",
>> "enable_guc_submission");
>> + i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = 0;
>> return;
>> }
>> - /* A negative value means "use platform default" */
>> - if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading < 0)
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading = HAS_GUC_UCODE(dev_priv);
>> -
>> /* Verify firmware version */
>> - if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading) {
>> - if (HAS_HUC_UCODE(dev_priv))
>> - intel_huc_select_fw(&dev_priv->huc);
>> + if (HAS_GUC_UCODE(dev_priv)) {
>
> Hmm, if !HAS_UCODE ?
Will do.
>
>> + if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission > 0) {
>> + DRM_INFO("Ignoring option %s - no firmware",
>> "enable_guc_submission");
>> + i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = 0;
>> + return;
>> + }
>> - if (intel_guc_fw_select(&dev_priv->guc))
>
> Hmm, I can't see now when fw will be selected...
> Note that you are using here HAS_GUC_UCODE that depends on fw path
>
I will see where I can make it evident that fw will be selected.
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading = 0;
>> + if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission < 0) {
>> + i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = 0;
>> + return;
>> + }
>> }
>> - /* Can't enable guc submission without guc loaded */
>> - if (!i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading)
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = 0;
>> + /*
>> + * A negative value means "use platform default" (enabled if we
>> have
>> + * survived to get here)
>> + */
>> - /* A negative value means "use platform default" */
>> if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission < 0)
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv);
>> + i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = HAS_GUC(dev_priv);
>
> At this point we are sure that we have GuC (with fw) so we can use
>
> i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = 1;
Will do.
>
>> }
>> void intel_uc_init_early(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>> @@ -154,7 +153,7 @@ int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv)
>> struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
>> int ret, attempts;
>> - if (!i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading)
>> + if (!NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv))
>> return 0;
>> guc_disable_communication(guc);
>> @@ -250,22 +249,16 @@ int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv)
>> err_guc:
>> i915_ggtt_disable_guc(dev_priv);
>> - if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading > 1 ||
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission > 1) {
>> + if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission > 1) {
>> DRM_ERROR("GuC init failed. Firmware loading disabled.\n");
>> ret = -EIO;
>> + } else if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission == 1) {
>> + DRM_NOTE("Falling back from GuC submission to execlist
>> mode.\n");
>> + ret = 0;
>> } else {
>> - DRM_NOTE("GuC init failed. Firmware loading disabled.\n");
>> ret = 0;
>> }
>> - if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission) {
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission = 0;
>> - DRM_NOTE("Falling back from GuC submission to execlist
>> mode\n");
>> - }
>> -
>> - i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading = 0;
>> -
>> return ret;
>> }
>> @@ -273,7 +266,7 @@ void intel_uc_fini_hw(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv)
>> {
>> guc_free_load_err_log(&dev_priv->guc);
>> - if (!i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading)
>> + if (!NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv))
>> return;
>> if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission)
Thanks for the review.
Regards,
Sujaritha
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list