[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/21] drm/i915/guc: Update GuC power domain states
Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
daniele.ceraolospurio at intel.com
Wed Aug 29 20:57:54 UTC 2018
On 29/08/18 12:10, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
> We should update GuC power domain states also when GuC submission
> is disabled, otherwise GuC might complain or ignore our requests.
> This seems to be required for all currently released GuC firmwares.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko at intel.com>
> Cc: John Spotswood <john.a.spotswood at intel.com>
> Cc: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa at intel.com>
> Cc: Tomasz Lis <tomasz.lis at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
> index 7c95697..7a3a4ca 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
> @@ -401,6 +401,10 @@ int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> ret = intel_guc_submission_enable(guc);
> if (ret)
> goto err_communication;
> + } else {
> + ret = intel_guc_sample_forcewake(guc);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_communication;
> }
We can just pull this out of intel_guc_submission_enable and call it
unconditionally instead of having the if here. Even better, we should
only call this when we write to GEN9_PG_ENABLE and pass the value we're
writing instead of re-calculating it inside the function, but that's a
job for another time I guess.
Daniele
>
> dev_info(i915->drm.dev, "GuC firmware version %u.%u\n",
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list