[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