[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/display: Fix phys_base to be relative not absolute

[Paz Zcharya]

On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 02:26:55PM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> 
> 
> On 21.11.2023 13:06, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> > On 18.11.2023 00:01, Paz Zcharya wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:13:59PM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Nov 05, 2023 at 05:27:03PM +0000, Paz Zcharya wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Rodrigo, thanks for the great comments.
> > > 
> > > Apologies for using a wrong/confusing terminology. I think 'phys_base'
> > > is supposed to be the offset in the GEM BO, where base (or
> > > "Surface Base Address") is supposed to be the GTT offset.
> > 
> > Since base is taken from PLANE_SURF register it should be resolvable via
> > GGTT to physical address pointing to actual framebuffer.
> > I couldn't find anything in the specs.
> 
> It was quite cryptic. I meant I have not found anything about assumption
> from commit history that for iGPU there should be 1:1 mapping, this is why
> there was an assignment "phys_base = base". Possibly the assumption is not
> valid anymore for MTL(?).
> Without the assumption we need to check GGTT to determine phys address.
> 
> > The simplest approach would be then do the same as in case of DGFX:
> >          gen8_pte_t __iomem *gte = to_gt(i915)->ggtt->gsm;
> >          gen8_pte_t pte;
> > 
> >          gte += base / I915_GTT_PAGE_SIZE;
> > 
> >          pte = ioread64(gte);
> >          phys_base = pte & I915_GTT_PAGE_MASK;
> > 
> > Regards
> > Andrzej
Hey Andrzej,

Sorry for the late response. I was OOO :)
I tried using the code you mentioned. It translates (in the very specific
case of MTL + GOP driver) to phys_base == 0080_0000h. Unfortunately, it
results in a corrupted screen -- the framebuffer is filled with zeros.

It seems like `i915_vma_pin_ww` already reserves and binds the GEM BO to the
correct address space independently of the value of `phys_base`.
The only thing `phys_base` affects is the value of `stolen->start`
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_stolen.c#L747

So it seems to me that the maybe `phys_base` is named incorrectly and that it
does not reflect the physical address, but the start offset of
i915->mm.stolen_region.

I'm happy to run more tests / debug further.
Do you have more ideas of things to try?


Many thanks,
Paz