[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix device info for devices without display

Mon Sep 26 14:58:52 UTC 2022

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 01:11:36PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>On Tue, 20 Sep 2022, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 11:10:53AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>>On Fri, 16 Sep 2022, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 11:26:42AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>>>>Commit 00c6cbfd4e8a ("drm/i915: move pipe_mask and cpu_transcoder_mask
>>>>>to runtime info") moved the pipe_mask member from struct
>>>>>intel_device_info to intel_runtime_info, but overlooked some of our
>>>>>platforms initializing device info .display = {}. This is significant,
>>>>>as pipe_mask is the single point of truth for a device having a display
>>>>>or not; the platforms in question left pipe_mask to whatever was set for
>>>>>the platforms they "inherit" from in the complex macro scheme we have.
>>>>>
>>>>>Add new NO_DISPLAY macro initializing .__runtime.pipe_mask = 0, which
>>>>>will cause the device info .display sub-struct to be zeroed in
>>>>>intel_device_info_runtime_init(). A better solution (or simply audit of
>>>>>proper use of HAS_DISPLAY() checks) is required before moving forward
>>>>>with [1].
>>>>>
>>>>>Also clear all the display related members in runtime info if there's no
>>>>>display. The latter is a bit tedious, but it's for completeness at this
>>>>>time, to ensure similar functionality as before.
>>>>>
>>>>>[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/dfda1bf67f02ceb07c280b7a13216405fd1f7a34.1660137416.git.jani.nikula@intel.com
>>>>>
>>>>>Fixes: 00c6cbfd4e8a ("drm/i915: move pipe_mask and cpu_transcoder_mask to runtime info")
>>>>>Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
>>>>>Cc: Maarten Lankhort <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
>>>>>Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
>>>>>---
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c          | 11 ++++++-----
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c |  6 ++++++
>>>>> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
>>>>>index 77e7df21f539..cd4487a1d3be 100644
>>>>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
>>>>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
>>>>>@@ -41,6 +41,8 @@
>>>>> 	.__runtime.media.ip.ver = (x), \
>>>>> 	.__runtime.display.ip.ver = (x)
>>>>>
>>>>>+#define NO_DISPLAY .__runtime.pipe_mask = 0
>>>>>+
>>>>> #define I845_PIPE_OFFSETS \
>>>>> 	.display.pipe_offsets = { \
>>>>> 		[TRANSCODER_A] = PIPE_A_OFFSET,	\
>>>>>@@ -519,9 +521,8 @@ static const struct intel_device_info ivb_m_gt2_info = {
>>>>> static const struct intel_device_info ivb_q_info = {
>>>>> 	GEN7_FEATURES,
>>>>> 	PLATFORM(INTEL_IVYBRIDGE),
>>>>>+	NO_DISPLAY,
>>>>> 	.gt = 2,
>>>>>-	.__runtime.pipe_mask = 0, /* legal, last one wins */
>>>>>-	.__runtime.cpu_transcoder_mask = 0,
>>>>> 	.has_l3_dpf = 1,
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>>@@ -1039,7 +1040,7 @@ static const struct intel_device_info xehpsdv_info = {
>>>>> 	XE_HPM_FEATURES,
>>>>> 	DGFX_FEATURES,
>>>>> 	PLATFORM(INTEL_XEHPSDV),
>>>>>-	.display = { },
>>>>>+	NO_DISPLAY,
>>>>> 	.has_64k_pages = 1,
>>>>> 	.needs_compact_pt = 1,
>>>>> 	.has_media_ratio_mode = 1,
>>>>>@@ -1081,7 +1082,7 @@ static const struct intel_device_info dg2_info = {
>>>>>
>>>>> static const struct intel_device_info ats_m_info = {
>>>>> 	DG2_FEATURES,
>>>>>-	.display = { 0 },
>>>>>+	NO_DISPLAY,
>>>>> 	.require_force_probe = 1,
>>>>> 	.tuning_thread_rr_after_dep = 1,
>>>>> };
>>>>>@@ -1103,7 +1104,7 @@ static const struct intel_device_info pvc_info = {
>>>>> 	.__runtime.graphics.ip.rel = 60,
>>>>> 	.__runtime.media.ip.rel = 60,
>>>>> 	PLATFORM(INTEL_PONTEVECCHIO),
>>>>>-	.display = { 0 },
>>>>>+	NO_DISPLAY,
>>>>> 	.has_flat_ccs = 0,
>>>>> 	.__runtime.platform_engine_mask =
>>>>> 		BIT(BCS0) |
>>>>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>>>>>index 1434dc33cf49..20575eb77ea7 100644
>>>>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>>>>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>>>>>@@ -433,8 +433,14 @@ void intel_device_info_runtime_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>>>> 		dev_priv->drm.driver_features &= ~(DRIVER_MODESET |
>>>>> 						   DRIVER_ATOMIC);
>>>>> 		memset(&info->display, 0, sizeof(info->display));
>>>>>+
>>>>>+		runtime->cpu_transcoder_mask = 0;
>>>>> 		memset(runtime->num_sprites, 0, sizeof(runtime->num_sprites));
>>>>> 		memset(runtime->num_scalers, 0, sizeof(runtime->num_scalers));
>>>>>+		runtime->fbc_mask = 0;
>>>>>+		runtime->has_hdcp = false;
>>>>>+		runtime->has_dmc = false;
>>>>>+		runtime->has_dsc = false;
>>>>
>>>> why are these not inside __runtime.display?
>>>
>>>The short answer, because there isn't one. It's an anonymous struct for
>>>now.
>>
>> /me confused... that doesn't really answer the question. Why would we
>> not move these inside a display substruct? When moving stuff out of
>> device_info.display.x, it seems the better place would be inside
>> __runtime.display.x, not __runtime.x.
>>
>> I must be missing something here. We had a "recent" move of these flags
>> lying around in device_info to be inside a display substruct -
>> commit d53db442db36 ("drm/i915: Move display device info capabilities to its
>> own struct") - to be able to keep the display flags together
>> and zero them together.
>
>So there were a few discussions spread around, but effectively the patch
>has stalled here.
>
>There's probably a bigger discussion to be had about the management of
>mutable and immutable device info, and display and non-display info.
>
>In the mean time, okay to merge this one?


Acked-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>

Lucas De Marchi