[PATCH v2 1/1] drm/xe/guc: Expose number of dss per group and helpers

Dong, Zhanjun zhanjun.dong at intel.com
Mon Jan 29 21:03:04 UTC 2024


Thanks for take time review it. Please see my comments below.

Regards,
Zhanjun

On 2024-01-29 3:17 p.m., Summers, Stuart wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-01-26 at 15:23 -0800, Zhanjun Dong wrote:
>> Expose helper for dss per group of mcr, features like GuC register
>> capture will need this info to prepare buffer required.
> 
> I don't understand what this specifically has to do with GuC. Can we
> just list this as general functionality, not related to GuC (cover
> letter) or MCR (function names, see below)?

Yes, will move it from drm/xe/guc to drm/xe

> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhanjun Dong <zhanjun.dong at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.c          | 38
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.h          | 17 +++++++++++
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_topology.c     |  3 --
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hw_engine_types.h |  3 ++
>>   4 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.c
>> index 77925b35cf8d..f7002623f3b5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.c
>> @@ -291,11 +291,16 @@ static void init_steering_mslice(struct xe_gt
>> *gt)
>>          gt->steering[LNCF].instance_target = 0;         /* unused */
>>   }
>>   
>> +int xe_gt_mcr_get_dss_per_group(struct xe_gt *gt)
> 
> I don't understand why we're tying this name to MCR. DSS are involved
> in more than just MCR negotiation/configuration.
> 
> I guess not a blocker, but I'd rather this just be something like:
> xe_gt_get_dss_per_group()
Sure, will be changed to this name

> 
>> +{
>> +       return gt_to_xe(gt)->info.platform == XE_PVC ? 8 : 4;
>> +}
>> +
>>   static void init_steering_dss(struct xe_gt *gt)
>>   {
>>          unsigned int dss = min(xe_dss_mask_group_ffs(gt-
>>> fuse_topo.g_dss_mask, 0, 0),
>>                                 xe_dss_mask_group_ffs(gt-
>>> fuse_topo.c_dss_mask, 0, 0));
>> -       unsigned int dss_per_grp = gt_to_xe(gt)->info.platform ==
>> XE_PVC ? 8 : 4;
>> +       unsigned int dss_per_grp = xe_gt_mcr_get_dss_per_group(gt);
>>   
>>          gt->steering[DSS].group_target = dss / dss_per_grp;
>>          gt->steering[DSS].instance_target = dss % dss_per_grp;
>> @@ -683,3 +688,34 @@ void xe_gt_mcr_steering_dump(struct xe_gt *gt,
>> struct drm_printer *p)
>>                  }
>>          }
>>   }
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * xe_gt_mcr_get_ss_steering - returns the group/instance steering
>> for a SS
>> + * @gt: GT structure
>> + * @dss: DSS ID to obtain steering for
>> + * @group: pointer to storage for steering group ID
>> + * @instance: pointer to storage for steering instance ID
>> + *
>> + * Returns the steering IDs (via the @group and @instance
>> parameters) that
>> + * correspond to a specific subslice/DSS ID.
>> + */
>> +void xe_gt_mcr_get_ss_steering(struct xe_gt *gt, unsigned int dss,
>> unsigned int *group,
>> +                              unsigned int *instance)
>> +{
>> +       int dss_per_grp = xe_gt_mcr_get_dss_per_group(gt);
>> +
>> +       *group = dss / dss_per_grp;
>> +       *instance = dss % dss_per_grp;
>> +}
>> +
>> +bool xe_gt_mcr_dss_has_subslice(struct xe_gt *gt, int slice, int
>> subslice)
>> +{
>> +       int dss_per_grp = xe_gt_mcr_get_dss_per_group(gt);
>> +       int index = slice * dss_per_grp + subslice;
>> +
>> +       if (index >= XE_MAX_DSS_FUSE_BITS)
> 
> Maybe interesting to print something here from a debugging perspective,
> especially on pre-silicon where maybe the fuse registers aren't set up
> correctly. Otherwise it's a bit of a goose chase trying to track down
> why the DSS count is 0, etc.
Sure, will add debug print for this out of range case.

> 
>> +               return false;
>> +       else
>> +               return test_bit(index, gt->fuse_topo.g_dss_mask) ||
>> +                      test_bit(index, gt->fuse_topo.c_dss_mask);
>> +}
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.h
>> index 27ca1bc880a0..1365b3e77226 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_mcr.h
>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>>   #define _XE_GT_MCR_H_
>>   
>>   #include "regs/xe_reg_defs.h"
>> +#include "xe_gt_types.h"
>>   
>>   struct drm_printer;
>>   struct xe_gt;
>> @@ -25,5 +26,21 @@ void xe_gt_mcr_multicast_write(struct xe_gt *gt,
>> struct xe_reg_mcr mcr_reg,
>>                                 u32 value);
>>   
>>   void xe_gt_mcr_steering_dump(struct xe_gt *gt, struct drm_printer
>> *p);
>> +int xe_gt_mcr_get_dss_per_group(struct xe_gt *gt);
>> +void xe_gt_mcr_get_ss_steering(struct xe_gt *gt, unsigned int dss,
>> +                              unsigned int *group, unsigned int
>> *instance);
>> +bool xe_gt_mcr_dss_has_subslice(struct xe_gt *gt, int slice, int
>> subslice);
>> +
>> +#define _HAS_SS(ss_, gt_, group_, instance_)
> 
> Why do we have the ss_ parameter?
Oops, not used arg
> 
>> xe_gt_mcr_dss_has_subslice(gt_, group_, instance_)
> 
> Same comment as above, why is this tied naming-wise to "mcr"?
> 
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Loop over each subslice/DSS and determine the group and instance
>> IDs that
>> + * should be used to steer MCR accesses toward this DSS.
>> + */
>> +#define for_each_ss_steering(ss_, gt_, group_, instance_) \
>> +       for (ss_ = 0, xe_gt_mcr_get_ss_steering(gt_, 0, &group_,
>> &instance_); \
> 
> IMO it's confusing calling get_ss_steering twice here. I understand the
> macro piece, but it would be nice if we could reduce this to one call.
The 1st call is the one time execution before code block running;
the 2nd xe_gt_mcr_get_ss_steering call will be run on every iteration, 
so this is by purpose and cann't be reduced.

> 
>> +            ss_ < XE_MAX_DSS_FUSE_BITS; \
>> +            ss_++, xe_gt_mcr_get_ss_steering(gt_, ss_, &group_,
>> &instance_)) \
>> +               for_each_if(_HAS_SS(ss_, gt_, group_, instance_))
>>   
>>   #endif /* _XE_GT_MCR_H_ */
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_topology.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_topology.c
>> index a8d7f272c30a..e973eeaac7f1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_topology.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_topology.c
>> @@ -11,9 +11,6 @@
>>   #include "xe_gt.h"
>>   #include "xe_mmio.h"
>>   
>> -#define XE_MAX_DSS_FUSE_BITS (32 * XE_MAX_DSS_FUSE_REGS)
>> -#define XE_MAX_EU_FUSE_BITS (32 * XE_MAX_EU_FUSE_REGS)
>> -
>>   static void
>>   load_dss_mask(struct xe_gt *gt, xe_dss_mask_t mask, int numregs,
>> ...)
>>   {
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hw_engine_types.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hw_engine_types.h
>> index d7f828c76cc5..3e978a190041 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hw_engine_types.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hw_engine_types.h
>> @@ -65,6 +65,9 @@ struct xe_bo;
>>   struct xe_execlist_port;
>>   struct xe_gt;
>>   
>> +#define XE_MAX_DSS_FUSE_BITS (32 * XE_MAX_DSS_FUSE_REGS)
>> +#define XE_MAX_EU_FUSE_BITS (32 * XE_MAX_EU_FUSE_REGS)
> 
> Sorry maybe obvious, but why did you make this move?
Before we expose the dss per group, the XE_MAX_DSS_FUSE_BITS only being 
referenced within xe_gt_topology.c. After this patch, these 2 macros 
will be used by for_each_ss_steering macro and thus being refrenced. 
Move it from the .c to xe_hw_engine_types.h to provide this definition.

> 
> Thanks,
> Stuart
> 
>> +
>>   /**
>>    * struct xe_hw_engine_class_intf - per hw engine class struct
>> interface
>>    *
> 


More information about the Intel-xe mailing list