subject:"Re\: \[PATCH\] drm\/amd\/amdgpu\: Make debugfs write compliment read"

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

2016-10-11 Thread Christian König

Hi Tom,

yeah, the timing issue is a good argument. In this case just go ahead 
and add my Acked-by to the patch.

Regards,
Christian.

Am 11.10.2016 um 14:19 schrieb StDenis, Tom:

Hi Christian,

I agree with the crux of your argument but you can crash the system 
with carefully timed read/writes from the GFX registers, or MC, or ... 
That's why the entries are root only.

The issue with locking excessively is you might change behaviour of 
something you're trying to debug because the kernel then has to wait 
on the lock (or you're waiting on the lock).  For instance, suppose 
you want to read DCE registers and the kernel is doing some gfx/grbm 
related your DCE read will either block the GFX activity or you're 
waiting on it which means the behaviour of the system could be 
different than from the case where you're not probing the registers.

The goal is to be as unobtrusive as possible.  Heck I often mmap the 
BAR so I can read MMIO registers directly and not waste CPU cycles on 
syscalls.

The PM lock is because reading PGFSM registers during a powerup/down 
results in a GPU hang, and we only take the GRBM lock when users want 
to read from specific banks.  For any other case we don't need a lock. 
 In the kernel they should be mutually exclusive.  The PM lock is only 
taken in PP when performing a transition (or initializing the core) 
and I have yet to see a place where PP/PM related code also grabs the 
grbm index lock.

I don't have strong feelings against your proposal but I do prefer not 
to take the locks when I don't need to.  Ultimately I'll leave the 
decision up to you and Alex.  I'd like to get the 2nd patch through 
though as it makes the write side of the mmio reg complimentary (e.g. 
bank selection/pm lock).

Cheers,
Tom

*From:* Christian König 
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 11, 2016 08:11
*To:* StDenis, Tom; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
*Subject:* Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

The only downside to taking the locks all the time is for 99% of 
debug reads it's unnecessary and in theory could lead to 
performance/behaviour problems.

Yeah, but performance isn't critical here and taking two locks 
compared to the rest of what we (IOCTL etc...) do is completely 
negligibly.

I've been using this on read for a while now and haven't noticed a 
problem.

My concern is rather that somebody tries to write to the PM regs on 
accident or purpose without taking the lock.

See, the kernel is usually responsible to keep people from doing 
stupid things with the hardware, even if those people are root and 
could do stupid things anyway. Well, you know what I mean?

Regards,
Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 22:21 schrieb StDenis, Tom:

The only downside to taking the locks all the time is for 99% of 
debug reads it's unnecessary and in theory could lead to 
performance/behaviour problems.

I've been using this on read for a while now and haven't noticed a 
problem.

Tom

*From:* Christian König 
*Sent:* Monday, October 10, 2016 09:49
*To:* Tom St Denis; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
*Cc:* StDenis, Tom
*Subject:* Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment 
read
Would it hurt us to always take the looks (both the pm as well as 
grbm idx lock)?

I don't think that would be much of an issue and I would have a 
better feeling with that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Tom St Denis:

that's kind of the point.  Its for debugging only.  Also reads can 
already lock

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 09:25 Christian König <mailto:deathsim...@vodafone.de>> wrote:

Mhm, that userspace controls if the lock is taken or not is a bit
problematic, on the other hand only root could access that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Tom St Denis:
> Add PG lock support as well as bank selection to
> the MMIO write function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom St Denis mailto:tom.stde...@amd.com>>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 43
++
>   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> index 04c4aee70452..a9d83c1d7a43 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> @@ -2637,10 +2637,45 @@ static ssize_t
amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file *f, const char __user *buf,
>   struct amdgpu_device *adev = f->f_inode->i_private;
>   ssize_t result = 0;
>   int r;
> + bool pm_pg_lock, use_bank;
> + unsigned instance_bank,

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

2016-10-11 Thread StDenis, Tom

Hi Christian,

I agree with the crux of your argument but you can crash the system with 
carefully timed read/writes from the GFX registers, or MC, or ... That's why 
the entries are root only.

The issue with locking excessively is you might change behaviour of something 
you're trying to debug because the kernel then has to wait on the lock (or 
you're waiting on the lock).  For instance, suppose you want to read DCE 
registers and the kernel is doing some gfx/grbm related your DCE read will 
either block the GFX activity or you're waiting on it which means the behaviour 
of the system could be different than from the case where you're not probing 
the registers.

The goal is to be as unobtrusive as possible.  Heck I often mmap the BAR so I 
can read MMIO registers directly and not waste CPU cycles on syscalls.

The PM lock is because reading PGFSM registers during a powerup/down results in 
a GPU hang, and we only take the GRBM lock when users want to read from 
specific banks.  For any other case we don't need a lock.  In the kernel they 
should be mutually exclusive.  The PM lock is only taken in PP when performing 
a transition (or initializing the core) and I have yet to see a place where 
PP/PM related code also grabs the grbm index lock.

I don't have strong feelings against your proposal but I do prefer not to take 
the locks when I don't need to.  Ultimately I'll leave the decision up to you 
and Alex.  I'd like to get the 2nd patch through though as it makes the write 
side of the mmio reg complimentary (e.g. bank selection/pm lock).

Cheers,
Tom

From: Christian König 
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 08:11
To: StDenis, Tom; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

The only downside to taking the locks all the time is for 99% of debug reads 
it's unnecessary and in theory could lead to performance/behaviour problems.

Yeah, but performance isn't critical here and taking two locks compared to the 
rest of what we (IOCTL etc...) do is completely negligibly.

I've been using this on read for a while now and haven't noticed a problem.

My concern is rather that somebody tries to write to the PM regs on accident or 
purpose without taking the lock.

See, the kernel is usually responsible to keep people from doing stupid things 
with the hardware, even if those people are root and could do stupid things 
anyway. Well, you know what I mean?

Regards,
Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 22:21 schrieb StDenis, Tom:

The only downside to taking the locks all the time is for 99% of debug reads 
it's unnecessary and in theory could lead to performance/behaviour problems.

I've been using this on read for a while now and haven't noticed a problem.

Tom

From: Christian König <mailto:deathsim...@vodafone.de>
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 09:49
To: Tom St Denis; 
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: StDenis, Tom
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Would it hurt us to always take the looks (both the pm as well as grbm idx 
lock)?

I don't think that would be much of an issue and I would have a better feeling 
with that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Tom St Denis:

that's kind of the point.  Its for debugging only.  Also reads can already lock

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 09:25 Christian König 
mailto:deathsim...@vodafone.de>> wrote:
Mhm, that userspace controls if the lock is taken or not is a bit
problematic, on the other hand only root could access that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Tom St Denis:
> Add PG lock support as well as bank selection to
> the MMIO write function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom St Denis mailto:tom.stde...@amd.com>>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 43 
> ++
>   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> index 04c4aee70452..a9d83c1d7a43 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> @@ -2637,10 +2637,45 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file 
> *f, const char __user *buf,
>   struct amdgpu_device *adev = f->f_inode->i_private;
>   ssize_t result = 0;
>   int r;
> + bool pm_pg_lock, use_bank;
> + unsigned instance_bank, sh_bank, se_bank;
>
>   if (size & 0x3 || *pos & 0x3)
>   return -EINVAL;
>
> + /* are we reading registers for which a PG lock is necessary? */
> + pm_pg_lock = (*pos >> 23) & 1;
> +
> + if (*pos & (1ULL << 62)) {
> + se_ban

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

2016-10-11 Thread Christian König

The only downside to taking the locks all the time is for 99% of debug 
reads it's unnecessary and in theory could lead to 
performance/behaviour problems.

Yeah, but performance isn't critical here and taking two locks compared 
to the rest of what we (IOCTL etc...) do is completely negligibly.

I've been using this on read for a while now and haven't noticed a 
problem.

My concern is rather that somebody tries to write to the PM regs on 
accident or purpose without taking the lock.

See, the kernel is usually responsible to keep people from doing stupid 
things with the hardware, even if those people are root and could do 
stupid things anyway. Well, you know what I mean?

Regards,
Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 22:21 schrieb StDenis, Tom:

The only downside to taking the locks all the time is for 99% of debug 
reads it's unnecessary and in theory could lead to 
performance/behaviour problems.

I've been using this on read for a while now and haven't noticed a 
problem.

Tom

*From:* Christian König 
*Sent:* Monday, October 10, 2016 09:49
*To:* Tom St Denis; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
*Cc:* StDenis, Tom
*Subject:* Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read
Would it hurt us to always take the looks (both the pm as well as grbm 
idx lock)?

I don't think that would be much of an issue and I would have a better 
feeling with that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Tom St Denis:

that's kind of the point.  Its for debugging only.  Also reads can 
already lock

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 09:25 Christian König <mailto:deathsim...@vodafone.de>> wrote:

Mhm, that userspace controls if the lock is taken or not is a bit
problematic, on the other hand only root could access that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Tom St Denis:
> Add PG lock support as well as bank selection to
> the MMIO write function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom St Denis mailto:tom.stde...@amd.com>>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 43
++
>   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> index 04c4aee70452..a9d83c1d7a43 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> @@ -2637,10 +2637,45 @@ static ssize_t
amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file *f, const char __user *buf,
>   struct amdgpu_device *adev = f->f_inode->i_private;
>   ssize_t result = 0;
>   int r;
> + bool pm_pg_lock, use_bank;
> + unsigned instance_bank, sh_bank, se_bank;
>
>   if (size & 0x3 || *pos & 0x3)
>   return -EINVAL;
>
> + /* are we reading registers for which a PG lock is
necessary? */
> + pm_pg_lock = (*pos >> 23) & 1;
> +
> + if (*pos & (1ULL << 62)) {
> + se_bank = (*pos >> 24) & 0x3FF;
> + sh_bank = (*pos >> 34) & 0x3FF;
> + instance_bank = (*pos >> 44) & 0x3FF;
> +
> + if (se_bank == 0x3FF)
> + se_bank = 0x;
> + if (sh_bank == 0x3FF)
> + sh_bank = 0x;
> + if (instance_bank == 0x3FF)
> + instance_bank = 0x;
> + use_bank = 1;
> + } else {
> + use_bank = 0;
> + }
> +
> + *pos &= 0x3;
> +
> + if (use_bank) {
> + if ((sh_bank != 0x && sh_bank >=
adev->gfx.config.max_sh_per_se) ||
> + (se_bank != 0x && se_bank >=
adev->gfx.config.max_shader_engines))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +  mutex_lock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, se_bank,
> + sh_bank, instance_bank);
> + }
> +
> + if (pm_pg_lock)
> + mutex_lock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> +
>   while (size) {
>   uint32_t value;
>
> @@ -2659,6 +2694,14 @@ static ssize_t
amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file *f, const char __user *buf,
>   size -= 4;
>   }
>
> + if (use_bank) {
> + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, 0x,
0x, 0x);
> +  mutex_unlock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> + }
> +
> + if (pm_pg_lock)
> +  mutex_unlock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> +
>   return result;
>   }
>

___
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

2016-10-10 Thread StDenis, Tom

The only downside to taking the locks all the time is for 99% of debug reads 
it's unnecessary and in theory could lead to performance/behaviour problems.


I've been using this on read for a while now and haven't noticed a problem.


Tom



From: Christian König 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 09:49
To: Tom St Denis; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: StDenis, Tom
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Would it hurt us to always take the looks (both the pm as well as grbm idx 
lock)?

I don't think that would be much of an issue and I would have a better feeling 
with that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Tom St Denis:

that's kind of the point.  Its for debugging only.  Also reads can already lock

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 09:25 Christian König 
mailto:deathsim...@vodafone.de>> wrote:
Mhm, that userspace controls if the lock is taken or not is a bit
problematic, on the other hand only root could access that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Tom St Denis:
> Add PG lock support as well as bank selection to
> the MMIO write function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom St Denis mailto:tom.stde...@amd.com>>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 43 
> ++
>   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> index 04c4aee70452..a9d83c1d7a43 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> @@ -2637,10 +2637,45 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file 
> *f, const char __user *buf,
>   struct amdgpu_device *adev = f->f_inode->i_private;
>   ssize_t result = 0;
>   int r;
> + bool pm_pg_lock, use_bank;
> + unsigned instance_bank, sh_bank, se_bank;
>
>   if (size & 0x3 || *pos & 0x3)
>   return -EINVAL;
>
> + /* are we reading registers for which a PG lock is necessary? */
> + pm_pg_lock = (*pos >> 23) & 1;
> +
> + if (*pos & (1ULL << 62)) {
> + se_bank = (*pos >> 24) & 0x3FF;
> + sh_bank = (*pos >> 34) & 0x3FF;
> + instance_bank = (*pos >> 44) & 0x3FF;
> +
> + if (se_bank == 0x3FF)
> + se_bank = 0x;
> + if (sh_bank == 0x3FF)
> + sh_bank = 0x;
> + if (instance_bank == 0x3FF)
> + instance_bank = 0x;
> + use_bank = 1;
> + } else {
> + use_bank = 0;
> + }
> +
> + *pos &= 0x3;
> +
> + if (use_bank) {
> + if ((sh_bank != 0x && sh_bank >= 
> adev->gfx.config.max_sh_per_se) ||
> + (se_bank != 0x && se_bank >= 
> adev->gfx.config.max_shader_engines))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + mutex_lock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, se_bank,
> + sh_bank, instance_bank);
> + }
> +
> + if (pm_pg_lock)
> + mutex_lock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> +
>   while (size) {
>   uint32_t value;
>
> @@ -2659,6 +2694,14 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file 
> *f, const char __user *buf,
>   size -= 4;
>   }
>
> + if (use_bank) {
> + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, 0x, 0x, 
> 0x);
> + mutex_unlock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> + }
> +
> + if (pm_pg_lock)
> + mutex_unlock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> +
>   return result;
>   }
>



___
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

2016-10-10 Thread StDenis, Tom

The pg lock is needed to read pgfsm registers so you wouldn't normally take 
grbm too.

Tom



 Original message 
From: Christian König 
Date: 2016-10-10 09:49 (GMT-05:00)
To: Tom St Denis , amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: "StDenis, Tom" 
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Would it hurt us to always take the looks (both the pm as well as grbm idx 
lock)?

I don't think that would be much of an issue and I would have a better feeling 
with that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Tom St Denis:

that's kind of the point.  Its for debugging only.  Also reads can already lock

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 09:25 Christian König 
mailto:deathsim...@vodafone.de>> wrote:
Mhm, that userspace controls if the lock is taken or not is a bit
problematic, on the other hand only root could access that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Tom St Denis:
> Add PG lock support as well as bank selection to
> the MMIO write function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom St Denis mailto:tom.stde...@amd.com>>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 43 
> ++
>   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> index 04c4aee70452..a9d83c1d7a43 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> @@ -2637,10 +2637,45 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file 
> *f, const char __user *buf,
>   struct amdgpu_device *adev = f->f_inode->i_private;
>   ssize_t result = 0;
>   int r;
> + bool pm_pg_lock, use_bank;
> + unsigned instance_bank, sh_bank, se_bank;
>
>   if (size & 0x3 || *pos & 0x3)
>   return -EINVAL;
>
> + /* are we reading registers for which a PG lock is necessary? */
> + pm_pg_lock = (*pos >> 23) & 1;
> +
> + if (*pos & (1ULL << 62)) {
> + se_bank = (*pos >> 24) & 0x3FF;
> + sh_bank = (*pos >> 34) & 0x3FF;
> + instance_bank = (*pos >> 44) & 0x3FF;
> +
> + if (se_bank == 0x3FF)
> + se_bank = 0x;
> + if (sh_bank == 0x3FF)
> + sh_bank = 0x;
> + if (instance_bank == 0x3FF)
> + instance_bank = 0x;
> + use_bank = 1;
> + } else {
> + use_bank = 0;
> + }
> +
> + *pos &= 0x3;
> +
> + if (use_bank) {
> + if ((sh_bank != 0x && sh_bank >= 
> adev->gfx.config.max_sh_per_se) ||
> + (se_bank != 0x && se_bank >= 
> adev->gfx.config.max_shader_engines))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + mutex_lock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, se_bank,
> + sh_bank, instance_bank);
> + }
> +
> + if (pm_pg_lock)
> + mutex_lock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> +
>   while (size) {
>   uint32_t value;
>
> @@ -2659,6 +2694,14 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file 
> *f, const char __user *buf,
>   size -= 4;
>   }
>
> + if (use_bank) {
> + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, 0x, 0x, 
> 0x);
> + mutex_unlock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> + }
> +
> + if (pm_pg_lock)
> + mutex_unlock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> +
>   return result;
>   }
>



___
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

2016-10-10 Thread Christian König

Would it hurt us to always take the looks (both the pm as well as grbm 
idx lock)?


I don't think that would be much of an issue and I would have a better 
feeling with that.


Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Tom St Denis:


that's kind of the point.  Its for debugging only. Also reads can 
already lock



On Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 09:25 Christian König > wrote:


Mhm, that userspace controls if the lock is taken or not is a bit
problematic, on the other hand only root could access that.

Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Tom St Denis:
> Add PG lock support as well as bank selection to
> the MMIO write function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom St Denis mailto:tom.stde...@amd.com>>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 43
++
>   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> index 04c4aee70452..a9d83c1d7a43 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> @@ -2637,10 +2637,45 @@ static ssize_t
amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file *f, const char __user *buf,
>   struct amdgpu_device *adev = f->f_inode->i_private;
>   ssize_t result = 0;
>   int r;
> + bool pm_pg_lock, use_bank;
> + unsigned instance_bank, sh_bank, se_bank;
>
>   if (size & 0x3 || *pos & 0x3)
>   return -EINVAL;
>
> + /* are we reading registers for which a PG lock is
necessary? */
> + pm_pg_lock = (*pos >> 23) & 1;
> +
> + if (*pos & (1ULL << 62)) {
> + se_bank = (*pos >> 24) & 0x3FF;
> + sh_bank = (*pos >> 34) & 0x3FF;
> + instance_bank = (*pos >> 44) & 0x3FF;
> +
> + if (se_bank == 0x3FF)
> + se_bank = 0x;
> + if (sh_bank == 0x3FF)
> + sh_bank = 0x;
> + if (instance_bank == 0x3FF)
> + instance_bank = 0x;
> + use_bank = 1;
> + } else {
> + use_bank = 0;
> + }
> +
> + *pos &= 0x3;
> +
> + if (use_bank) {
> + if ((sh_bank != 0x && sh_bank >=
adev->gfx.config.max_sh_per_se) ||
> + (se_bank != 0x && se_bank >=
adev->gfx.config.max_shader_engines))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + mutex_lock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, se_bank,
> + sh_bank, instance_bank);
> + }
> +
> + if (pm_pg_lock)
> + mutex_lock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> +
>   while (size) {
>   uint32_t value;
>
> @@ -2659,6 +2694,14 @@ static ssize_t
amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file *f, const char __user *buf,
>   size -= 4;
>   }
>
> + if (use_bank) {
> + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, 0x,
0x, 0x);
> + mutex_unlock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> + }
> +
> + if (pm_pg_lock)
> + mutex_unlock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> +
>   return result;
>   }
>




___
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

2016-10-10 Thread Tom St Denis

that's kind of the point.  Its for debugging only.  Also reads can already
lock

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 09:25 Christian König  wrote:

> Mhm, that userspace controls if the lock is taken or not is a bit
> problematic, on the other hand only root could access that.
>
> Christian.
>
> Am 10.10.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Tom St Denis:
> > Add PG lock support as well as bank selection to
> > the MMIO write function.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tom St Denis 
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 43
> ++
> >   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> > index 04c4aee70452..a9d83c1d7a43 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
> > @@ -2637,10 +2637,45 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct
> file *f, const char __user *buf,
> >   struct amdgpu_device *adev = f->f_inode->i_private;
> >   ssize_t result = 0;
> >   int r;
> > + bool pm_pg_lock, use_bank;
> > + unsigned instance_bank, sh_bank, se_bank;
> >
> >   if (size & 0x3 || *pos & 0x3)
> >   return -EINVAL;
> >
> > + /* are we reading registers for which a PG lock is necessary? */
> > + pm_pg_lock = (*pos >> 23) & 1;
> > +
> > + if (*pos & (1ULL << 62)) {
> > + se_bank = (*pos >> 24) & 0x3FF;
> > + sh_bank = (*pos >> 34) & 0x3FF;
> > + instance_bank = (*pos >> 44) & 0x3FF;
> > +
> > + if (se_bank == 0x3FF)
> > + se_bank = 0x;
> > + if (sh_bank == 0x3FF)
> > + sh_bank = 0x;
> > + if (instance_bank == 0x3FF)
> > + instance_bank = 0x;
> > + use_bank = 1;
> > + } else {
> > + use_bank = 0;
> > + }
> > +
> > + *pos &= 0x3;
> > +
> > + if (use_bank) {
> > + if ((sh_bank != 0x && sh_bank >=
> adev->gfx.config.max_sh_per_se) ||
> > + (se_bank != 0x && se_bank >=
> adev->gfx.config.max_shader_engines))
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + mutex_lock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> > + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, se_bank,
> > + sh_bank, instance_bank);
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (pm_pg_lock)
> > + mutex_lock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> > +
> >   while (size) {
> >   uint32_t value;
> >
> > @@ -2659,6 +2694,14 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct
> file *f, const char __user *buf,
> >   size -= 4;
> >   }
> >
> > + if (use_bank) {
> > + amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, 0x, 0x,
> 0x);
> > + mutex_unlock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (pm_pg_lock)
> > + mutex_unlock(&adev->pm.mutex);
> > +
> >   return result;
> >   }
> >
>
>
>
___
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

2016-10-10 Thread Christian König

Mhm, that userspace controls if the lock is taken or not is a bit 
problematic, on the other hand only root could access that.


Christian.

Am 10.10.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Tom St Denis:

Add PG lock support as well as bank selection to
the MMIO write function.

Signed-off-by: Tom St Denis 
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 43 ++
  1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
index 04c4aee70452..a9d83c1d7a43 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
@@ -2637,10 +2637,45 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file 
*f, const char __user *buf,
struct amdgpu_device *adev = f->f_inode->i_private;
ssize_t result = 0;
int r;
+   bool pm_pg_lock, use_bank;
+   unsigned instance_bank, sh_bank, se_bank;
  
  	if (size & 0x3 || *pos & 0x3)

return -EINVAL;
  
+	/* are we reading registers for which a PG lock is necessary? */

+   pm_pg_lock = (*pos >> 23) & 1;
+
+   if (*pos & (1ULL << 62)) {
+   se_bank = (*pos >> 24) & 0x3FF;
+   sh_bank = (*pos >> 34) & 0x3FF;
+   instance_bank = (*pos >> 44) & 0x3FF;
+
+   if (se_bank == 0x3FF)
+   se_bank = 0x;
+   if (sh_bank == 0x3FF)
+   sh_bank = 0x;
+   if (instance_bank == 0x3FF)
+   instance_bank = 0x;
+   use_bank = 1;
+   } else {
+   use_bank = 0;
+   }
+
+   *pos &= 0x3;
+
+   if (use_bank) {
+   if ((sh_bank != 0x && sh_bank >= 
adev->gfx.config.max_sh_per_se) ||
+   (se_bank != 0x && se_bank >= 
adev->gfx.config.max_shader_engines))
+   return -EINVAL;
+   mutex_lock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
+   amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, se_bank,
+   sh_bank, instance_bank);
+   }
+
+   if (pm_pg_lock)
+   mutex_lock(&adev->pm.mutex);
+
while (size) {
uint32_t value;
  
@@ -2659,6 +2694,14 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_regs_write(struct file *f, const char __user *buf,

size -= 4;
}
  
+	if (use_bank) {

+   amdgpu_gfx_select_se_sh(adev, 0x, 0x, 
0x);
+   mutex_unlock(&adev->grbm_idx_mutex);
+   }
+
+   if (pm_pg_lock)
+   mutex_unlock(&adev->pm.mutex);
+
return result;
  }
  



___
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: Make debugfs write compliment read

8 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information