Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on platforms w/o GuC submission
> From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 3:10 PM
> To: Hiatt, Don ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Ewins, Jon ; KiteStramuort
> ; S . Zharkoff ;
> Wajdeczko, Michal ; Summers, Stuart
> ; Chris Wilson ; Tomas
> Janousek
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on
> platforms w/o GuC submission
>
>
>
> On 11/15/2019 2:22 PM, Hiatt, Don wrote:
> >
> >> From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
> >> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 2:02 PM
> >> To: Hiatt, Don ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> >> Cc: Ewins, Jon ; KiteStramuort
> >> ; S . Zharkoff ;
> >> Wajdeczko, Michal ; Summers, Stuart
> >> ; Chris Wilson ;
> Tomas
> >> Janousek
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on
> >> platforms w/o GuC submission
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/15/19 10:20 AM, don.hi...@intel.com wrote:
> >>> From: Don Hiatt
> >>>
> >>> On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but
> >>> the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication)
> >>> calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to
> >>> enter RC6. We can remove the GuC suspend/resume entirely as we do
> >>> not need to save the GuC submission status.
> >>>
> >>> Add intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() function to determine if
> >>> GuC submission is active.
> >>>
> >>> v2: Do not suspend/resume the GuC on platforms that do not support
> >>> Guc Submission.
> >>> v3: Fix typo, move suspend logic to remove goto.
> >>> v4: Use intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() to check GuC submission
> >>> status.
> >>> v5: No need to look at engine to determine if submission is enabled.
> >>> Squash fix + intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() patch into one.
> >>>
> >>> Reported-by: KiteStramuort
> >>> Reported-by: S. Zharkoff
> >>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111594
> >>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111623
> >>> Fixes: f774f0964919 ("drm/i915/guc: Turn on GuC/HuC auto mode")
> >> I don't think this Fixes tag is appropriate since we already reverted
> >> that patch.
> >>
> > Can you suggest an appropriate tag? Chris suggest "guc/huc enabling by
> default" patch
> > but I couldn't find it and this one seemed similar.
>
> Do we want to backport this even if guc is off by default and taints on
> enabling? if we do, then we probably need to go all the way back to when
> we introduced the new binaries that show the problem ("drm/i915/guc:
> Updates for GuC 32.0.3 firmware").
>
Yes, we do as the original reports was with the user specifically enabling
with the driver parameters.
Thanks a lot! The update patch will be posted in a second.
> Daniele
>
> >
> >>> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko
> >>> Cc: Daniele Ceralo Spurio
> >>> Cc: Stuart Summers
> >>> Cc: Chris Wilson
> >>> Tested-by: Tomas Janousek
> >>> Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
> >>> ---
> >>>drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c | 7 +++
> >>>drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 8
> >>>drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h| 6 ++
> >>>3 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> >>> index 019ae6486e8d..92d9305c0d73 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> >>> @@ -553,6 +553,13 @@ int intel_guc_suspend(struct intel_guc *guc)
> >>> GUC_POWER_D1, /* any value greater than GUC_POWER_D0
> >> */
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * If GuC communication is enabled but submission is not supported,
> >>> + * we do not need to suspend the GuC.
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (!intel_guc_submission_is_enabled(guc))
> >>> + return 0;
> >>> +
> >>> /*
> >>>* The ENTER_S_STATE action queues the save/restore operation
> >>> in GuC
> >> FW
> >>>* and then returns, so waiting on the H2G is not enough to
> >>> guarantee
&
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on platforms w/o GuC submission
> From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 2:02 PM
> To: Hiatt, Don ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Ewins, Jon ; KiteStramuort
> ; S . Zharkoff ;
> Wajdeczko, Michal ; Summers, Stuart
> ; Chris Wilson ; Tomas
> Janousek
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on
> platforms w/o GuC submission
>
>
>
> On 11/15/19 10:20 AM, don.hi...@intel.com wrote:
> > From: Don Hiatt
> >
> > On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but
> > the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication)
> > calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to
> > enter RC6. We can remove the GuC suspend/resume entirely as we do
> > not need to save the GuC submission status.
> >
> > Add intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() function to determine if
> > GuC submission is active.
> >
> > v2: Do not suspend/resume the GuC on platforms that do not support
> > Guc Submission.
> > v3: Fix typo, move suspend logic to remove goto.
> > v4: Use intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() to check GuC submission
> > status.
> > v5: No need to look at engine to determine if submission is enabled.
> > Squash fix + intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() patch into one.
> >
> > Reported-by: KiteStramuort
> > Reported-by: S. Zharkoff
> > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111594
> > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111623
> > Fixes: f774f0964919 ("drm/i915/guc: Turn on GuC/HuC auto mode")
>
> I don't think this Fixes tag is appropriate since we already reverted
> that patch.
>
Can you suggest an appropriate tag? Chris suggest "guc/huc enabling by default"
patch
but I couldn't find it and this one seemed similar.
> > Cc: Michal Wajdeczko
> > Cc: Daniele Ceralo Spurio
> > Cc: Stuart Summers
> > Cc: Chris Wilson
> > Tested-by: Tomas Janousek
> > Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c | 7 +++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 8
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h| 6 ++
> > 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > index 019ae6486e8d..92d9305c0d73 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > @@ -553,6 +553,13 @@ int intel_guc_suspend(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > GUC_POWER_D1, /* any value greater than GUC_POWER_D0
> */
> > };
> >
> > + /*
> > +* If GuC communication is enabled but submission is not supported,
> > +* we do not need to suspend the GuC.
> > +*/
> > + if (!intel_guc_submission_is_enabled(guc))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > /*
> > * The ENTER_S_STATE action queues the save/restore operation in GuC
> FW
> > * and then returns, so waiting on the H2G is not enough to guarantee
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > index 629b19377a29..4dd43b99a334 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > @@ -605,6 +605,14 @@ static int __uc_resume(struct intel_uc *uc, bool
> enable_communication)
> > if (enable_communication)
> > guc_enable_communication(guc);
> >
> > + /*
> > +* If GuC communication is enabled but submission is not supported,
> > +* we do not need to resume the GuC but we do need to enable the
> > +* GuC communication on resume (above).
> > +*/
> > + if (!intel_guc_submission_is_enabled(guc))
> > + return 0;
> > +
>
> I would put this check inside intel_guc_resume(), for symmetry with the
> one you put inside intel_guc_suspend().
>
Will do.
> Daniele
>
> > err = intel_guc_resume(guc);
> > if (err) {
> > DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Failed to resume GuC, err=%d", err);
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > index 7bc1d8c102b2..2b879472e760 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > @@ -2044,4 +2044,10 @@ i915_coherent_map_type(struct drm_i915_private
> *i915)
> > return HAS_LLC(i915) ? I915_MAP_WB : I915_MAP_WC;
> > }
> >
> > +static inline bool intel_guc_submission_is_enabled(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > +{
> > + return intel_guc_is_submission_supported(guc) &&
> > + intel_guc_is_running(guc);
> > +}
> > +
> > #endif
> >
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on platforms w/o GuC submission
Hi Stuart/Chris, > From: Chris Wilson > Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 9:20 AM > To: Hiatt, Don ; Summers, Stuart > ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC > action on platforms w/o GuC submission > > Quoting Summers, Stuart (2019-11-15 17:12:58) > > On Thu, 2019-11-14 at 17:11 -0800, don.hi...@intel.com wrote: > > > From: Don Hiatt > > > > > > On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but > > > the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication) > > > calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to > > > enter RC6. We can remove the GuC suspend/resume entirely as we do > > > not need to save the GuC submission status. > > > > > > v2: Do not suspend/resume the GuC on platforms that do not support > > > Guc Submission. > > > v3: Fix typo, move suspend logic to remove goto. > > > v4: Use intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() to check GuC submission > > > status. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt > > > > Any reason not to just combine both of these into a single patch? > > Also please remember to include the bugzilla link, ask if the reporter > wants to be credited, and most important of all a Fixes: so we can > backport it correctly. If there is no singular cause, point at the > "guc/huc enabling by default" patch. > > Last but not least, think about how did we miss in this CI and provide > a Testcase: to verify that it is fixed and stays fixed. > -Chris Hi Stuart/Chris. Actually, I'll just combine them now. I think your point is valid and being a single patch will make it easier to backport and track wrt to Chris's comments. Thanks, don ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on platforms w/o GuC submission
> From: Tomas Janousek > Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 9:29 AM > To: Chris Wilson > Cc: Hiatt, Don ; Summers, Stuart > ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on > platforms w/o GuC submission > > Don, Chris, > > Also, as mentioned in another comment: > > Tested-by: Tomas Janousek > Thanks, Tomas. I replied to your comment earlier today. I'll include your 'Tested-by'. Thanks, don > (Do note that I'm running a backport to 5.3, > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=145969, not drm-tip.) > > -- > Tomáš Janoušek, a.k.a. Pivník, a.k.a. Liskni_si, http://work.lisk.in/ ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on platforms w/o GuC submission
> From: Chris Wilson > Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 9:20 AM > To: Hiatt, Don ; Summers, Stuart > ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC > action on platforms w/o GuC submission > > Quoting Summers, Stuart (2019-11-15 17:12:58) > > On Thu, 2019-11-14 at 17:11 -0800, don.hi...@intel.com wrote: > > > From: Don Hiatt > > > > > > On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but > > > the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication) > > > calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to > > > enter RC6. We can remove the GuC suspend/resume entirely as we do > > > not need to save the GuC submission status. > > > > > > v2: Do not suspend/resume the GuC on platforms that do not support > > > Guc Submission. > > > v3: Fix typo, move suspend logic to remove goto. > > > v4: Use intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() to check GuC submission > > > status. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt > > > > Any reason not to just combine both of these into a single patch? > > Also please remember to include the bugzilla link, ask if the reporter > wants to be credited, and most important of all a Fixes: so we can > backport it correctly. If there is no singular cause, point at the > "guc/huc enabling by default" patch. > > Last but not least, think about how did we miss in this CI and provide > a Testcase: to verify that it is fixed and stays fixed. > -Chris Will do, thanks Chris. don ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on platforms w/o GuC submission
> From: Summers, Stuart
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 9:13 AM
>
> On Thu, 2019-11-14 at 17:11 -0800, don.hi...@intel.com wrote:
> > From: Don Hiatt
> >
> > On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but
> > the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication)
> > calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to
> > enter RC6. We can remove the GuC suspend/resume entirely as we do
> > not need to save the GuC submission status.
> >
> > v2: Do not suspend/resume the GuC on platforms that do not support
> > Guc Submission.
> > v3: Fix typo, move suspend logic to remove goto.
> > v4: Use intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() to check GuC submission
> > status.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
>
> Any reason not to just combine both of these into a single patch?
>
> Thanks,
> Stuart
>
I didn't combine them for two reasons:
1) I wasn't sure if there'd be an ask to use intel_guc_submission_is_enabled()
in
other places.
2) The git log entry highlights the introduction of a new function available
for use.
I'll combine them if that's the consensus.
don
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c | 7 +++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 8
> > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > index 019ae6486e8d..92d9305c0d73 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > @@ -553,6 +553,13 @@ int intel_guc_suspend(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > GUC_POWER_D1, /* any value greater than GUC_POWER_D0
> */
> > };
> >
> > + /*
> > +* If GuC communication is enabled but submission is not
> > supported,
> > +* we do not need to suspend the GuC.
> > +*/
> > + if (!intel_guc_submission_is_enabled(guc))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > /*
> > * The ENTER_S_STATE action queues the save/restore operation
> > in GuC FW
> > * and then returns, so waiting on the H2G is not enough to
> > guarantee
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > index 629b19377a29..4dd43b99a334 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > @@ -605,6 +605,14 @@ static int __uc_resume(struct intel_uc *uc, bool
> > enable_communication)
> > if (enable_communication)
> > guc_enable_communication(guc);
> >
> > + /*
> > +* If GuC communication is enabled but submission is not
> > supported,
> > +* we do not need to resume the GuC but we do need to enable
> > the
> > +* GuC communication on resume (above).
> > +*/
> > + if (!intel_guc_submission_is_enabled(guc))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > err = intel_guc_resume(guc);
> > if (err) {
> > DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Failed to resume GuC, err=%d", err);
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/guc: Add GuC method to determine if submission is active.
> From: Tomas Janousek
> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2019 3:11 AM
> To: Hiatt, Don
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/guc: Add GuC method to determine if
> submission is active.
>
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 09:40:02AM -0800, don.hi...@intel.com wrote:
> > Add intel_guc_submission_is_enabled() function to determine if
> > GuC submission is active. Based on code by Michal Wajdeczko.
>
> Don't forget to update USES_GUC_SUBMISSION (and/or
> intel_uc_uses_guc_submission) to use this new function.
>
Michal said that you have to use USE_GUC_SUBMISSION until the engines
are up and that this function can't replace it's usage.
Michal: Based upon the feedback, do you have any issue with me going back to
v2 of the patch?
> (And I still think the "drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on" patch
> should just use USES_GUC_SUBMISSION. The current version (v3 & v4) of the
> patch which splits the logic between intel_guc.c and intel_uc.c just to avoid
> the goto is making the code harder to maintain, in my opinion.)
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h | 1 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 14 ++
> > 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > index 2498c55e0ea5..0aaef7c07879 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > @@ -1081,7 +1081,7 @@ static void guc_interrupts_release(struct intel_gt
> *gt)
> > rps->pm_intrmsk_mbz &= ~ARAT_EXPIRED_INTRMSK;
> > }
> >
> > -static void guc_set_default_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> > +void guc_set_default_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> > {
> > /*
> > * We inherit a bunch of functions from execlists that we'd like
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h
> > index 54d716828352..a0132f061ebc 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h
> > @@ -63,5 +63,6 @@ void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc
> *guc);
> > void intel_guc_submission_fini(struct intel_guc *guc);
> > int intel_guc_preempt_work_create(struct intel_guc *guc);
> > void intel_guc_preempt_work_destroy(struct intel_guc *guc);
> > +void guc_set_default_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine);
> >
> > #endif
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > index 7e0f67babe20..878d574bb1c1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > @@ -78,8 +78,10 @@
> >
> > #include "gt/intel_lrc.h"
> > #include "gt/intel_engine.h"
> > +#include "gt/intel_gt.h"
> > #include "gt/intel_gt_types.h"
> > #include "gt/intel_workarounds.h"
> > +#include "gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h"
> > #include "gt/uc/intel_uc.h"
> >
> > #include "intel_device_info.h"
> > @@ -2032,4 +2034,16 @@ i915_coherent_map_type(struct drm_i915_private
> *i915)
> > return HAS_LLC(i915) ? I915_MAP_WB : I915_MAP_WC;
> > }
> >
> > +static inline bool intel_guc_submission_is_enabled(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > +{
> > + struct intel_gt *gt = guc_to_gt(guc);
> > + struct intel_engine_cs *engine;
> > + enum intel_engine_id id;
> > +
> > + for_each_engine(engine, gt, id)
> > + return engine->set_default_submission ==
> > + guc_set_default_submission;
> > + return false;
> > +}
> > +
> > #endif
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
> > ___
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
>
> --
> Tomáš Janoušek, a.k.a. Pivník, a.k.a. Liskni_si, http://work.lisk.in/
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action on platforms w/o GuC submission
> From: Wajdeczko, Michal
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 5:33 AM
> To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Hiatt, Don
> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Skip suspend/resume GuC action
> on platforms w/o GuC submission
>
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 22:25:27 +0100, wrote:
>
> > From: Don Hiatt
> >
> > On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but
> > the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication)
> > calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to
> > enter RC6. We can remove the GuC suspend/remove entirely as we do
> > not need to save the GuC submission status.
> >
> > v2: Do not suspend/resume the GuC on platforms that do not support
> > Guc Submission.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 17 +
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > index 3fdbc935d155..04031564f0b1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> > @@ -572,10 +572,19 @@ void intel_uc_runtime_suspend(struct intel_uc *uc)
> > if (!intel_guc_is_running(guc))
> > return;
> > + /*
> > +* If GuC communciation is enabled but submission is not supported,
>
> typo
>
> > +* we do not need to suspend the GuC but we do need to disable the
> > +* GuC communication on suspend.
> > +*/
> > + if (!guc->submission_supported)
>
> Using submission_supported flag directly can be tricky, as today it
> is always set to false, but in the future it may indicate either that
> submission is supported by the driver/fw and/or enabled by modparam.
>
> There is no guarantee that it will reflect actual runtime status,
> as even supported/unblocked guc submission may fallback to execlists.
>
> We may need something like intel_guc_submission_is_active() that will
> reflect actual mode of submission currently used by the driver.
Hi Michal,
I looked at your patch wrt checking the set_default_submission vfunc but
as that is for the engine, and here I only have access to the intel_guc struct.
I'm not sure just where I can know what the default submission is and then
flag it somewhere that I can then check here in the suspend/resume. I'll keep
looking (sorry, I'm very new to this code). 😊
Thanks,
don
>
> > + goto guc_disable_comm;
>
> and maybe we can move above logic to intel_guc_suspend()
> to do not introduce extra goto's ?
>
> > +
> > err = intel_guc_suspend(guc);
> > if (err)
> > DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Failed to suspend GuC, err=%d", err);
> > +guc_disable_comm:
> > guc_disable_communication(guc);
> > }
> > @@ -605,6 +614,14 @@ static int __uc_resume(struct intel_uc *uc, bool
> > enable_communication)
> > if (enable_communication)
> > guc_enable_communication(guc);
> > + /*
> > +* If GuC communciation is enabled but submission is not supported,
>
> typo
>
> > +* we do not need to resume the GuC but we do need to enable the
> > +* GuC communication on resume (above).
> > +*/
> > + if (!guc->submission_supported)
> > + return 0;
>
> see suspend case comment
>
> > +
> > err = intel_guc_resume(guc);
> > if (err) {
> > DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Failed to resume GuC, err=%d", err);
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms w/o GuC submission but enabled
> > From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
> > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 11:30 AM
> > To: Hiatt, Don ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms w/o
> GuC
> > submission but enabled
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/28/19 11:17 AM, Hiatt, Don wrote:
> > >> From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
> > >> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 9:44 AM
> > >> To: Hiatt, Don ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > >> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms
> > >> w/o
> > GuC
> > >> submission but enabled
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 10/24/19 9:29 AM, don.hi...@intel.com wrote:
> > >>> From: Don Hiatt
> > >>>
> > >>> Check to see if GuC submission is enabled before requesting the
> > >>> EXIT_S_STATE action.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> You're only skipping the resume, but does it make any sense to do the
> > >> suspend action if we're not going to call the resume one? Does guc do
> > >> anything in the suspend action that we still require? I thought it only
> > >> saved the submission status, which we don't care about if guc submission
> > >> is disabled.
> > >>
> > >> Daniele
> > >>
> > >
> > > Hi Daniele,
> > >
> > > I tried skipping the suspend all together but then the HuC gets timeouts
> > > waiting for the GuC to acknowledge the authentication request which leads
> to
> > a
> > > wedged GPU. ☹
> > >
> >
> > Do we know why? if we skip the suspend/resume H2G and reload the blobs
> > after resetting the HW it should look like a clean boot from the HW
> > perspective, so the fact that HuC auth times out feels weird and might
> > hide other issues. I asked one of the guc devs and he also thinks this
> > is not expected behavior. Can you dig a bit more?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Daniele
> >
>
> No idea why but I'll do some digging and see what I find.
>
> Thanks!
>
> don
>
Hi Daniele,
I was a little overzealous on my removal of suspend/resume. We still need to go
through the steps of enable/disable GuC communication on suspend/resume but
just not send the GuC action. My first attempt was not handling the GuC
communication
properly so that is why I was seeing the HuC authentication timesouts.
I'm submitting new patch -- with the proper 'drm/i915' -- and will CC you.
Thanks!
don
> > > BTW, I made a typo in the patch, should be 'drm/i915' not '914', I'll fix
> > > that
> > > up.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > don
> > >
> > >
> > >>> On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but
> > >>> the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication)
> > >>> calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to
> > >>> enter RC6. Guard against this by only requesting the GuC action on
> > >>> platforms that support GuC submission.
> > >>>
> > >>> I've verfied that intel_guc_resume() only gets called when driver
> > >>> is loaded with: guc_enable={1,2,3}, all other cases (no args,
> > >>> guc_enable={0,-1} the intel_guc_resume() is not called.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
> > >>> ---
> > >>>drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c | 5 -
> > >>>1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >>>
> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > >>> index 37f7bcbf7dac..33318ed135c0 100644
> > >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > >>> @@ -565,7 +565,10 @@ int intel_guc_resume(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > >>> GUC_POWER_D0,
> > >>> };
> > >>>
> > >>> - return intel_guc_send(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action));
> > >>> + if (guc->submission_supported)
> > >>> + return intel_guc_send(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action));
> > >>> +
> > >>> + return 0;
> > >>>}
> > >>>
> > >>>/**
> > >>>
> ___
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms w/o GuC submission but enabled
> From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 11:30 AM
> To: Hiatt, Don ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms w/o GuC
> submission but enabled
>
>
>
> On 10/28/19 11:17 AM, Hiatt, Don wrote:
> >> From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
> >> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 9:44 AM
> >> To: Hiatt, Don ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms w/o
> GuC
> >> submission but enabled
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 10/24/19 9:29 AM, don.hi...@intel.com wrote:
> >>> From: Don Hiatt
> >>>
> >>> Check to see if GuC submission is enabled before requesting the
> >>> EXIT_S_STATE action.
> >>>
> >>
> >> You're only skipping the resume, but does it make any sense to do the
> >> suspend action if we're not going to call the resume one? Does guc do
> >> anything in the suspend action that we still require? I thought it only
> >> saved the submission status, which we don't care about if guc submission
> >> is disabled.
> >>
> >> Daniele
> >>
> >
> > Hi Daniele,
> >
> > I tried skipping the suspend all together but then the HuC gets timeouts
> > waiting for the GuC to acknowledge the authentication request which leads to
> a
> > wedged GPU. ☹
> >
>
> Do we know why? if we skip the suspend/resume H2G and reload the blobs
> after resetting the HW it should look like a clean boot from the HW
> perspective, so the fact that HuC auth times out feels weird and might
> hide other issues. I asked one of the guc devs and he also thinks this
> is not expected behavior. Can you dig a bit more?
>
> Thanks,
> Daniele
>
No idea why but I'll do some digging and see what I find.
Thanks!
don
> > BTW, I made a typo in the patch, should be 'drm/i915' not '914', I'll fix
> > that
> > up.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > don
> >
> >
> >>> On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but
> >>> the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication)
> >>> calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to
> >>> enter RC6. Guard against this by only requesting the GuC action on
> >>> platforms that support GuC submission.
> >>>
> >>> I've verfied that intel_guc_resume() only gets called when driver
> >>> is loaded with: guc_enable={1,2,3}, all other cases (no args,
> >>> guc_enable={0,-1} the intel_guc_resume() is not called.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
> >>> ---
> >>>drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c | 5 -
> >>>1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> >>> index 37f7bcbf7dac..33318ed135c0 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> >>> @@ -565,7 +565,10 @@ int intel_guc_resume(struct intel_guc *guc)
> >>> GUC_POWER_D0,
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> - return intel_guc_send(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action));
> >>> + if (guc->submission_supported)
> >>> + return intel_guc_send(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action));
> >>> +
> >>> + return 0;
> >>>}
> >>>
> >>>/**
> >>>
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms w/o GuC submission but enabled
> From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 9:44 AM
> To: Hiatt, Don ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms w/o GuC
> submission but enabled
>
>
>
> On 10/24/19 9:29 AM, don.hi...@intel.com wrote:
> > From: Don Hiatt
> >
> > Check to see if GuC submission is enabled before requesting the
> > EXIT_S_STATE action.
> >
>
> You're only skipping the resume, but does it make any sense to do the
> suspend action if we're not going to call the resume one? Does guc do
> anything in the suspend action that we still require? I thought it only
> saved the submission status, which we don't care about if guc submission
> is disabled.
>
> Daniele
>
Hi Daniele,
I tried skipping the suspend all together but then the HuC gets timeouts
waiting for the GuC to acknowledge the authentication request which leads to a
wedged GPU. ☹
BTW, I made a typo in the patch, should be 'drm/i915' not '914', I'll fix that
up.
Thanks,
don
> > On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but
> > the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication)
> > calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to
> > enter RC6. Guard against this by only requesting the GuC action on
> > platforms that support GuC submission.
> >
> > I've verfied that intel_guc_resume() only gets called when driver
> > is loaded with: guc_enable={1,2,3}, all other cases (no args,
> > guc_enable={0,-1} the intel_guc_resume() is not called.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c | 5 -
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > index 37f7bcbf7dac..33318ed135c0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > @@ -565,7 +565,10 @@ int intel_guc_resume(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > GUC_POWER_D0,
> > };
> >
> > - return intel_guc_send(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action));
> > + if (guc->submission_supported)
> > + return intel_guc_send(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action));
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > }
> >
> > /**
> >
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i914/guc: Fix resume on platforms w/o GuC submission but enabled
> On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 09:29 -0700, don.hi...@intel.com wrote:
> > From: Don Hiatt
> >
> > Check to see if GuC submission is enabled before requesting the
> > EXIT_S_STATE action.
> >
> > On some platforms (e.g. KBL) that do not support GuC submission, but
> > the user enabled the GuC communication (e.g for HuC authentication)
> > calling the GuC EXIT_S_STATE action results in lose of ability to
> > enter RC6. Guard against this by only requesting the GuC action on
> > platforms that support GuC submission.
> >
> > I've verfied that intel_guc_resume() only gets called when driver
> > is loaded with: guc_enable={1,2,3}, all other cases (no args,
> > guc_enable={0,-1} the intel_guc_resume() is not called.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Don Hiatt
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c | 5 -
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > index 37f7bcbf7dac..33318ed135c0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.c
> > @@ -565,7 +565,10 @@ int intel_guc_resume(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > GUC_POWER_D0,
> > };
> >
> > - return intel_guc_send(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action));
> > + if (guc->submission_supported)
>
> Hey Don,
>
> I might be missing something here, but glancing over the code for
> submission_supported, it looks like this relies on the availability of
> the firmware for the intended platform. Looking at the GuC table for
> KBL, I do see this present (using KBL per your commit above). So
> wouldn't this return true here if enable_guc is set to 1 or 3?
>
> Thanks,
> Stuart
Hi Stuart,
KBL does not support GuC submission, just HuC authentication. I've instrumented
the code and verified that all guc->submission_supported is always false when
guc_enable
is set for KBL.
Thanks,
don
>
> > + return intel_guc_send(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action));
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > }
> >
> > /**
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
