On 2/6/2024 08:33, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 01/02/2024 18:25, Souza, Jose wrote:
On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 08:55 +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 24/01/2024 08:19, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
Add reporting of the GuC submissio/VF interface version via GETPARAM
properties. Mesa intends to use this information to check for old
firmware versions with known bugs before enabling features like async
compute.
There was
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/560704/?series=124592&rev=1
which does everything in one go so would be my preference.
IMO Joonas version brings less burden to be maintained(no new struct).
But both versions works, please just get into some agreement so we
can move this forward.
So I would really prefer the query. Simplified version would do like
the compile tested only:
Vivaik's patch is definitely preferred. It is much cleaner to make one
single call than having to make four separate calls. It is also
extensible to other firmwares if required. The only blockage against it
was whether it was a good thing to report at all. If that blockage is no
longer valid then we should just merge the patch that has already been
discussed, polished, fixed, etc. rather than starting the whole process
from scratch.
And note that it is four calls not three. The code below is missing the
branch version number.
John.
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_query.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_query.c
index 00871ef99792..999687f6a3d4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_query.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_query.c
@@ -551,6 +551,37 @@ static int query_hwconfig_blob(struct
drm_i915_private *i915,
return hwconfig->size;
}
+static int
+query_guc_submission_version(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
+ struct drm_i915_query_item *query)
+{
+ struct drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version __user *query_ptr =
+ u64_to_user_ptr(query->data_ptr);
+ struct drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version ver;
+ struct intel_guc *guc = &to_gt(i915)->uc.guc;
+ const size_t size = sizeof(ver);
+ int ret;
+
+ if (!intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(&to_gt(i915)->uc))
+ return -ENODEV;
+
+ ret = copy_query_item(&ver, size, size, query);
+ if (ret != 0)
+ return ret;
+
+ if (ver.major || ver.minor || ver.patch)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ ver.major = guc->submission_version.major;
+ ver.minor = guc->submission_version.minor;
+ ver.patch = guc->submission_version.patch;
+
+ if (copy_to_user(query_ptr, &ver, size))
+ return -EFAULT;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
static int (* const i915_query_funcs[])(struct drm_i915_private
*dev_priv,
struct drm_i915_query_item
*query_item) = {
query_topology_info,
@@ -559,6 +590,7 @@ static int (* const i915_query_funcs[])(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
query_memregion_info,
query_hwconfig_blob,
query_geometry_subslices,
+ query_guc_submission_version,
};
int i915_query_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct
drm_file *file)
diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
index 550c496ce76d..d80d9b5e1eda 100644
--- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
@@ -3038,6 +3038,7 @@ struct drm_i915_query_item {
* - %DRM_I915_QUERY_MEMORY_REGIONS (see struct
drm_i915_query_memory_regions)
* - %DRM_I915_QUERY_HWCONFIG_BLOB (see `GuC HWCONFIG blob
uAPI`)
* - %DRM_I915_QUERY_GEOMETRY_SUBSLICES (see struct
drm_i915_query_topology_info)
+ * - %DRM_I915_QUERY_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION (see struct
drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version)
*/
__u64 query_id;
#define DRM_I915_QUERY_TOPOLOGY_INFO 1
@@ -3046,6 +3047,7 @@ struct drm_i915_query_item {
#define DRM_I915_QUERY_MEMORY_REGIONS 4
#define DRM_I915_QUERY_HWCONFIG_BLOB 5
#define DRM_I915_QUERY_GEOMETRY_SUBSLICES 6
+#define DRM_I915_QUERY_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION 7
/* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
/**
@@ -3591,6 +3593,15 @@ struct drm_i915_query_memory_regions {
struct drm_i915_memory_region_info regions[];
};
+/**
+* struct drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version - query GuC submission
interface version
+*/
+struct drm_i915_query_guc_submission_version {
+ __u64 major;
+ __u64 minor;
+ __u64 patch;
+};
+
/**
* DOC: GuC HWCONFIG blob uAPI
*
It is not that much bigger that the triple get param and IMO nicer.
But if there is no motivation to do it properly then feel free to
proceed with this, I will not block it.
Regards,
Tvrtko
P.S.
Probably still make sure to remove the reference to SR-IOV.
During the time of that patch there was discussion whether firmware
version or submission version was better. I vaguely remember someone
raised an issue with the latter. Adding John in case he remembers.
Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahti...@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org>
Cc: Jose Souza <jose.so...@intel.com>
Cc: Sagar Ghuge <sagar.gh...@intel.com>
Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zan...@intel.com>
Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.v...@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 12 ++++++++++++
include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 13 +++++++++++++
2 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
index 5c3fec63cb4c1..f176372debc54 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
@@ -113,6 +113,18 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device
*dev, void *data,
if (value < 0)
return value;
break;
+ case I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MAJOR:
+ case I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MINOR:
+ case I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_PATCH:
+ if (!intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(&to_gt(i915)->uc))
+ return -ENODEV;
+ if (param->param == I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MAJOR)
+ value = to_gt(i915)->uc.guc.submission_version.major;
+ else if (param->param ==
I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MINOR)
+ value = to_gt(i915)->uc.guc.submission_version.minor;
+ else
+ value = to_gt(i915)->uc.guc.submission_version.patch;
+ break;
case I915_PARAM_MMAP_GTT_VERSION:
/* Though we've started our numbering from 1, and so
class all
* earlier versions as 0, in effect their value is
undefined as
diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
index fd4f9574d177a..7d5a47f182542 100644
--- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
@@ -806,6 +806,19 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
*/
#define I915_PARAM_PXP_STATUS 58
+/*
+ * Query for the GuC submission/VF interface version number
What is this VF you speak of? :/
Regards,
Tvrtko
+ *
+ * -ENODEV is returned if GuC submission is not used
+ *
+ * On success, returns the respective GuC submission/VF interface
major,
+ * minor or patch version as per the requested parameter.
+ *
+ */
+#define I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MAJOR 59
+#define I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_MINOR 60
+#define I915_PARAM_GUC_SUBMISSION_VERSION_PATCH 61
+
/* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
/**
