[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v10 4/6] drm/i915/gt: Re-work reset_csb

[Matt Roper]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 10:36:34AM -0800, Michael Cheng wrote:
> Use drm_clflush_virt_range instead of directly invoking clflush. This
> will prevent compiler errors when building for non-x86 architectures.
> 
> v2(Michael Cheng): Remove extra clflush
> 
> v3(Michael Cheng): Remove memory barrier since drm_clflush_virt_range
> 		   takes care of it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Cheng <michael.cheng at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c
> index 6186a5e4b191..11b864fd68a5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c
> @@ -2945,9 +2945,8 @@ reset_csb(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, struct i915_request **inactive)
>  {
>  	struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists = &engine->execlists;
>  
> -	mb(); /* paranoia: read the CSB pointers from after the reset */
> -	clflush(execlists->csb_write);
> -	mb();
> +	drm_clflush_virt_range(execlists->csb_write,
> +			       sizeof(execlists->csb_write));

I think you technically want sizeof(execlists->csb_write[0]) here,
right?  I.e., the size of the value (32-bits), not the size of the
pointer (32 or 64 depending on architecture).  Not that it will really
change the behavior since it all works out to a single cacheline in the
end.

Aside from that,

Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com>

>  
>  	inactive = process_csb(engine, inactive); /* drain preemption events */
>  
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

-- 
Matt Roper
Graphics Software Engineer
VTT-OSGC Platform Enablement
Intel Corporation
(916) 356-2795