[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 1/6] drm/i915/pxp: Make gt and pxp init/fini aware of PXP-owning-GT

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 04:30:13PM -0800, Alan Previn wrote:
> In preparation for future MTL-PXP feature support, PXP control
> context should only valid on the correct gt tile. Depending on the
> device-info this depends on which tile owns the VEBOX and KCR.
> PXP is still a global feature though (despite its control-context
> located in the owning GT structure). Additionally, we find
> that the HAS_PXP macro is only used within the pxp module,
> 
> That said, lets drop that HAS_PXP macro altogether and replace it
> with a more fitting named intel_gtpxp_is_supported and helpers
> so that PXP init/fini can use to verify if the referenced gt supports
> PXP or teelink.

Yep, I understand you as I'm not fan of these macros, specially
single usage. But we need to consider that we have multiple dependencies
there and other cases like this in the driver... Well, but I'm not
opposing, but probably better to first get rid of the macro,
then change the behavior of the function on the next patch.

> 
> Add TODO for Meteorlake that will come in future series.

This refactor patch should be standalone, without poputing it with
the changes that didn't came yet to this point.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h              |  4 ----
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.c         | 22 ++++++++++++++------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.h         |  3 +++
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp_debugfs.c |  2 +-
>  4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> index 7e3820d2c404..0616e5f0bd31 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> @@ -933,10 +933,6 @@ IS_SUBPLATFORM(const struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>  
>  #define HAS_GLOBAL_MOCS_REGISTERS(dev_priv)	(INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->has_global_mocs)
>  
> -#define HAS_PXP(dev_priv)  ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_PXP) && \
> -			    INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->has_pxp) && \
> -			    VDBOX_MASK(to_gt(dev_priv)))
> -
>  #define HAS_GMCH(dev_priv) (INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->display.has_gmch)
>  
>  #define HAS_GMD_ID(i915)	(INTEL_INFO(i915)->has_gmd_id)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.c
> index 5efe61f67546..d993e752bd36 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.c
> @@ -44,6 +44,20 @@ struct intel_gt *pxp_to_gt(const struct intel_pxp *pxp)
>  	return container_of(pxp, struct intel_gt, pxp);
>  }
>  
> +static bool _gt_needs_teelink(struct intel_gt *gt)
> +{
> +	/* TODO: MTL won't rely on CONFIG_INTEL_MEI_PXP but on GSC engine */
> +	return (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL_MEI_PXP) && intel_huc_is_loaded_by_gsc(&gt->uc.huc) &&
> +		intel_uc_uses_huc(&gt->uc));
> +}
> +
> +bool intel_pxp_supported_on_gt(const struct intel_pxp *pxp)

If we are asking if it is supported on gt, then the argument must be a gt struct.

> +{
> +	/* TODO: MTL won't rely on CONFIG_INTEL_MEI_PXP but on GSC engine */
> +	return (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL_MEI_PXP) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_PXP) &&
> +		INTEL_INFO((pxp_to_gt(pxp))->i915)->has_pxp && VDBOX_MASK(pxp_to_gt(pxp)));
> +}
> +
>  bool intel_pxp_is_enabled(const struct intel_pxp *pxp)
>  {
>  	return pxp->ce;
> @@ -142,17 +156,13 @@ void intel_pxp_init(struct intel_pxp *pxp)
>  {
>  	struct intel_gt *gt = pxp_to_gt(pxp);
>  
> -	/* we rely on the mei PXP module */
> -	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL_MEI_PXP))
> -		return;

I took a time to understand this movement based on the commit description.
I have the feeling that this patch deserves further split in different patches.

But also, looking a few lines above pxp_to_gt(pxp), I believe we
have further refactor to do sooner. is is one pxp per gt, then we
need to only enable in the gt0?

> -
>  	/*
>  	 * If HuC is loaded by GSC but PXP is disabled, we can skip the init of
>  	 * the full PXP session/object management and just init the tee channel.
>  	 */
> -	if (HAS_PXP(gt->i915))
> +	if (intel_pxp_supported_on_gt(pxp))
>  		pxp_init_full(pxp);
> -	else if (intel_huc_is_loaded_by_gsc(&gt->uc.huc) && intel_uc_uses_huc(&gt->uc))
> +	else if (_gt_needs_teelink(gt))
>  		intel_pxp_tee_component_init(pxp);
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.h
> index 2da309088c6d..efa83f9d5e24 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp.h
> @@ -13,6 +13,9 @@ struct intel_pxp;
>  struct drm_i915_gem_object;
>  
>  struct intel_gt *pxp_to_gt(const struct intel_pxp *pxp);
> +
> +bool intel_pxp_supported_on_gt(const struct intel_pxp *pxp);
> +
>  bool intel_pxp_is_enabled(const struct intel_pxp *pxp);
>  bool intel_pxp_is_active(const struct intel_pxp *pxp);
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp_debugfs.c
> index 4359e8be4101..f0ad6f34624a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp_debugfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp_debugfs.c
> @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ void intel_pxp_debugfs_register(struct intel_pxp *pxp, struct dentry *gt_root)
>  	if (!gt_root)
>  		return;
>  
> -	if (!HAS_PXP((pxp_to_gt(pxp)->i915)))
> +	if (!intel_pxp_supported_on_gt(pxp))
>  		return;
>  
>  	root = debugfs_create_dir("pxp", gt_root);
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>