On 02/05/17 05:39, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
We are using some scratch registers in MMIO based send function.
Make their base and count flexible in preparation of upcoming
GuC firmware/hardware changes.
Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdec...@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com>
Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahti...@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h | 7 +++++++
2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
index 72f49e6..73c3324 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
@@ -260,9 +260,35 @@ void intel_uc_fini_fw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
__intel_uc_fw_fini(&dev_priv->huc.fw);
}
+static inline i915_reg_t guc_send_reg(struct intel_guc *guc, u32 i)
+{
+ GEM_BUG_ON(!guc->send_regs.base);
+ GEM_BUG_ON(!guc->send_regs.count);
+ GEM_BUG_ON(i >= guc->send_regs.count);
+
+ return _MMIO(guc->send_regs.base + 4 * i);
+}
+
+static void guc_init_send_regs(struct intel_guc *guc)
+{
+ struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
+ enum forcewake_domains fw_domains = 0;
+ u32 i;
+
+ guc->send_regs.base = i915_mmio_reg_offset(SOFT_SCRATCH(0));
+ guc->send_regs.count = SOFT_SCRATCH_COUNT - 1;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < guc->send_regs.count; i++) {
+ fw_domains |= intel_uncore_forcewake_for_reg(dev_priv,
+ guc_send_reg(guc, i),
+ FW_REG_READ | FW_REG_WRITE);
+ }
+ guc->send_regs.fw_domains = fw_domains;
+}
+
static int guc_enable_communication(struct intel_guc *guc)
{
- /* XXX: placeholder for alternate setup */
Is it worth retaining this comment? We still expect the new _send
mechanism setup to be added here, right?
+ guc_init_send_regs(guc);
guc->send = intel_guc_send_mmio;
return 0;
}
@@ -407,19 +433,19 @@ int intel_guc_send_mmio(struct intel_guc *guc, const u32
*action, u32 len)
int i;
int ret;
- if (WARN_ON(len < 1 || len > 15))
- return -EINVAL;
+ GEM_BUG_ON(!len);
+ GEM_BUG_ON(len > guc->send_regs.count);
Should we call out this change from WARN to GEM_BUG in the commit message?
Nitpicks aside,
Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com>
Regards,
Daniele
mutex_lock(&guc->send_mutex);
- intel_uncore_forcewake_get(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_BLITTER);
+ intel_uncore_forcewake_get(dev_priv, guc->send_regs.fw_domains);
dev_priv->guc.action_count += 1;
dev_priv->guc.action_cmd = action[0];
for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
- I915_WRITE(SOFT_SCRATCH(i), action[i]);
+ I915_WRITE(guc_send_reg(guc, i), action[i]);
- POSTING_READ(SOFT_SCRATCH(i - 1));
+ POSTING_READ(guc_send_reg(guc, i - 1));
intel_guc_notify(guc);
@@ -428,7 +454,7 @@ int intel_guc_send_mmio(struct intel_guc *guc, const u32
*action, u32 len)
* Fast commands should still complete in 10us.
*/
ret = __intel_wait_for_register_fw(dev_priv,
- SOFT_SCRATCH(0),
+ guc_send_reg(guc, 0),
INTEL_GUC_RECV_MASK,
INTEL_GUC_RECV_MASK,
10, 10, &status);
@@ -450,7 +476,7 @@ int intel_guc_send_mmio(struct intel_guc *guc, const u32
*action, u32 len)
}
dev_priv->guc.action_status = status;
- intel_uncore_forcewake_put(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_BLITTER);
+ intel_uncore_forcewake_put(dev_priv, guc->send_regs.fw_domains);
mutex_unlock(&guc->send_mutex);
return ret;
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
index 097289b..a37a8cc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
@@ -205,6 +205,13 @@ struct intel_guc {
uint64_t submissions[I915_NUM_ENGINES];
uint32_t last_seqno[I915_NUM_ENGINES];
+ /* GuC's FW specific registers used in MMIO send */
+ struct {
+ u32 base;
+ u32 count;
+ u32 fw_domains; /* enum forcewake_domains */
+ } send_regs;
+
/* To serialize the intel_guc_send actions */
struct mutex send_mutex;
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
