On 2022-10-21 09:05, Liang, Prike wrote:
[Public]
-----Original Message-----
From: Kuehling, Felix <felix.kuehl...@amd.com>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2022 1:11 PM
To: Liang, Prike <prike.li...@amd.com>; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Deucher, Alexander <alexander.deuc...@amd.com>; Zhang, Yifan <yifan1.zh...@amd.com>;
Huang, Ray <ray.hu...@amd.com>; Liu, Aaron <aaron....@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/amdkfd: introduce dummy cache info for property
asic
Am 2022-10-20 um 21:50 schrieb Liang, Prike:
[Public]
-----Original Message-----
From: Kuehling, Felix <felix.kuehl...@amd.com>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2022 12:03 AM
To: Liang, Prike <prike.li...@amd.com>; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Deucher, Alexander <alexander.deuc...@amd.com>; Zhang, Yifan
<yifan1.zh...@amd.com>; Huang, Ray <ray.hu...@amd.com>; Liu, Aaron
<aaron....@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/amdkfd: introduce dummy cache info for
property asic
Am 2022-10-20 um 05:15 schrieb Prike Liang:
This dummy cache info will enable kfd base function support.
Signed-off-by: Prike Liang <prike.li...@amd.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_crat.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
[snip]
@@ -1528,7 +1574,10 @@ static int kfd_fill_gpu_cache_info(struct kfd_dev *kdev,
kfd_fill_gpu_cache_info_from_gfx_config(kdev,
pcache_info);
break;
default:
- return -EINVAL;
+ pcache_info = dummy_cache_info;
+ num_of_cache_types = ARRAY_SIZE(dummy_cache_info);
+ pr_warn("dummy cache info is used temporarily and real cache
info need update later.\n");
+ break;
Could we make this return an error if the amdgpu.exp_hw_support module
parameter is not set?
Regards,
Felix
[Prike] It's fine to protect this dummy info by checking the parameter
amdgpu_exp_hw_support, but it may not friendly to end user by adding the
parameter and some guys will still report KFD not enabled for this parameter
setting problem. The original idea is the end user will not aware the dummy
cache info and only alert the warning message to developer.
I thought the intention was to simplify bring-up but make sure that valid cache
info is available by the time a chip goes into production.
Therefore, normal end users should never need to set the amdgpu_exp_hw_support
option. I think you're saying that we would go to production with dummy info.
That seems like a bad idea to me.
Regards,
Felix
[Prike] Sorry for the confusion. In fact, this dummy cache info only used
before production and meanwhile needn't require any parameter setting for CQE
do KFD test. Anyway if you still have concern on this solution I will add the
condition of checking amdgpu_exp_hw_support.
The idea to control this with a module parameter was to cause a more
obvious failure if we don't have correct cache info before going to
production. Just a warning in the log file is too easy to miss or
ignore. Of course, if QA gets into the habit of testing with
amdgpu_exp_hw_support, then this may not solve the problem. You need to
have at least one test pass without amdgpu_exp_hw_support to catch
missing cache info.
Regards,
Felix
