[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 1/2] drm/i915/cnl: Implement WaProgramMgsrForCorrectSliceSpecificMmioReads

Chris Wilson chris at chris-wilson.co.uk
Wed Mar 28 16:03:16 UTC 2018


Quoting Zhang, Yunwei (2018-03-28 16:54:26)
> 
> 
> On 3/27/2018 4:13 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Zhang, Yunwei (2018-03-27 23:49:27)
> >>
> >> On 3/27/2018 3:27 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>> Quoting Yunwei Zhang (2018-03-27 23:14:16)
> >>>> WaProgramMgsrForCorrectSliceSpecificMmioReads dictate that before any MMIO
> >>>> read into Slice/Subslice specific registers, MCR packet control
> >>>> register(0xFDC) needs to be programmed to point to any enabled
> >>>> slice/subslice pair. Otherwise, incorrect value will be returned.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, that means each subsequent MMIO read will be forwarded to a
> >>>> specific slice/subslice combination as read is unicast. This is OK since
> >>>> slice/subslice specific register values are consistent in almost all cases
> >>>> across slice/subslice. There are rare occasions such as INSTDONE that this
> >>>> value will be dependent on slice/subslice combo, in such cases, we need to
> >>>> program 0xFDC and recover this after. This is already covered by
> >>>> read_subslice_reg.
> >>>>
> >>>> Also, 0xFDC will lose its information after TDR/engine reset/power state
> >>>> change.
> >>>>
> >>>> References: HSD#1405586840, BSID#0575
> >>>>
> >>>> v2:
> >>>>    - use fls() instead of find_last_bit() (Chris)
> >>>>    - added INTEL_SSEU to extract sseu from device info. (Chris)
> >>>> v3:
> >>>>    - rebase on latest tip
> >>>> v5:
> >>>>    - Added references (Mika)
> >>>>    - Change the ordered of passing arguments and etc. (Ursulin)
> >>>>
> >>>> Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo at intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Michel Thierry <michel.thierry at intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >>>> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at linux.intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Yunwei Zhang <yunwei.zhang at intel.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>>>    1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
> >>>> index de09fa4..4c78d1e 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
> >>>> @@ -796,6 +796,27 @@ const char *i915_cache_level_str(struct drm_i915_private *i915, int type)
> >>>>           }
> >>>>    }
> >>>>    
> >>>> +static u32 calculate_mcr(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, u32 mcr)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +       const struct sseu_dev_info *sseu = &(INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->sseu);
> >>>> +       u32 slice = fls(sseu->slice_mask);
> >>>> +       u32 subslice = fls(sseu->subslice_mask[slice]);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +       mcr &= ~(GEN8_MCR_SLICE_MASK | GEN8_MCR_SUBSLICE_MASK);
> >>>> +       mcr |= GEN8_MCR_SLICE(slice) | GEN8_MCR_SUBSLICE(subslice);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +       return mcr;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static void wa_init_mcr(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +       u32 mcr;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +       mcr = I915_READ(GEN8_MCR_SELECTOR);
> >>>> +       mcr = calculate_mcr(dev_priv, mcr);
> >>>> +       I915_WRITE(GEN8_MCR_SELECTOR, mcr);
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>>    static inline uint32_t
> >>>>    read_subslice_reg(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int slice,
> >>>>                     int subslice, i915_reg_t reg)
> >>>> @@ -828,18 +849,29 @@ read_subslice_reg(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int slice,
> >>>>           intel_uncore_forcewake_get__locked(dev_priv, fw_domains);
> >>>>    
> >>>>           mcr = I915_READ_FW(GEN8_MCR_SELECTOR);
> >>>> +
> >>>>           /*
> >>>>            * The HW expects the slice and sublice selectors to be reset to 0
> >>>>            * after reading out the registers.
> >>>>            */
> >>>> -       WARN_ON_ONCE(mcr & mcr_slice_subslice_mask);
> >>>> +       WARN_ON_ONCE(INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 10 &&
> >>>> +                    (mcr & mcr_slice_subslice_mask));
> >>>>           mcr &= ~mcr_slice_subslice_mask;
> >>>>           mcr |= mcr_slice_subslice_select;
> >>>>           I915_WRITE_FW(GEN8_MCR_SELECTOR, mcr);
> >>>>    
> >>>>           ret = I915_READ_FW(reg);
> >>>>    
> >>>> -       mcr &= ~mcr_slice_subslice_mask;
> >>>> +       /*
> >>>> +        * WaProgramMgsrForCorrectSliceSpecificMmioReads:cnl
> >>>> +        * expects mcr to be programed to a enabled slice/subslice pair
> >>>> +        * before any MMIO read into slice/subslice register
> >>>> +        */
> >>> So the read was above, where we did set the subslice_select
> >>> appropriately. Here we are resetting back to 0 *after* the read, as the
> >>> comment before indicates.
> >>>
> >>> So what are you trying to accomplish with this patch? Other than leaving
> >>> the code in conflict with itself.
> >>> -Chris
> >> Hi Chris,
> >>
> >> The comment mentioned 0xFDC needs to be reset to 0 was before this WA
> >> was introduced, in later HW, this WA requires 0xFDC to be programmed to
> >> a enabled slice/subslice.
> >>
> >> What this patch does it to initialize 0xFDC once at the initialization
> >> (also it will be called after engine reset/TDR/coming out of c6) and
> >> make sure every time it is changed, it will be reprogrammed to a enabled
> >> slice/subslice so that a MMIO
> >> read will get the correct value. read_subslice_reg changes the 0xFDC
> >> value and if it is set to 0, it will cause MMIO read to return invalid
> >> value for s/ss specific registers.
> > What mmio read? The only accessor should be this function.
> >
> > And still the two comments are in direct conflict with each other.
> > -Chris
> This function is only used in INST_DONE case which you need to iterate 
> through each slice/subslice to check and makes sense to program MCR for 
> each s/ss combination. But there could be inadvertent read into this 
> range without using this function, the value would be wrong without this 
> WA.

Sure, but garbage in, garbage out. If we write an accessor for a
register because it requires a workaround, anyone who wants to access
the register should use the accessor. Not just leave HW in a random
state so that one particular selector works.
-Chris


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list