Re: [PATCH 1/1] [RFC] drm/ttm: Don't init dma32_zone on 64-bit systems

2019-02-18 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
Hmm, This zone was intended to stop TTM page allocations from exhausting the DMA32 zone. IIRC dma_alloc_coherent() uses DMA32 by default, which means if we drop this check, other devices may stop functioning unexpectedly? However, in the end I'd expect the kernel page allocation system to mak

Re: [PATCH] drm: prefix header search paths with $(srctree)/

2019-02-18 Thread Masahiro Yamada
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 1:01 PM Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > Currently, the Kbuild core manipulates header search paths in a crazy > way [1]. > > To fix this mess, I want all Makefiles to add explicit $(srctree)/ to > the search paths in the srctree. Some Makefiles are already written in > that way,

[PATCH] drm/amdgpu/powerplay: fix spelling mistake: "Attemp" -> "Attempt"

2019-02-18 Thread Colin King
From: Colin Ian King There are multiple occurrances of the same spelling mistake in messages in PP_ASSERT_WITH_CODE macros. Fix these. Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/smumgr/vega12_smumgr.c | 12 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/smumgr/vega20_smumgr.c

Re: [PATCH 1/1] [RFC] drm/ttm: Don't init dma32_zone on 64-bit systems

2019-02-18 Thread Koenig, Christian
Another good question is also why the heck the acc_size counts towards the DMA32 zone? In other words why should the internal bookkeeping pages be allocated in the DMA32 zone? That doesn't sounds valid to me in any way, Christian. Am 18.02.19 um 09:02 schrieb Thomas Hellstrom: > Hmm, > > This

Re: [PATCH 1/1] [RFC] drm/ttm: Don't init dma32_zone on 64-bit systems

2019-02-18 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
On Mon, 2019-02-18 at 09:20 +, Koenig, Christian wrote: > Another good question is also why the heck the acc_size counts > towards > the DMA32 zone? DMA32 TTM pages are accounted in the DMA32 zone. Other pages are not. For small persistent allocations using ttm_mem_global_alloc(), they are a

Re: [PATCH 09/11] drm/syncobj: add transition iotcls between binary and timeline

2019-02-18 Thread zhoucm1
Hi Lionel, I checked your igt test case, uint64_t points[5] = { 1, 5, 3, 7, 6 }; which is illegal signal order. I must admit we should handle it gracefully if signal isn't in-order, and we shouldn't lead to deadlock. Hi Christian, Can we just ignore when signal point X <= timeline Y? Or ju

Re: [PATCH 09/11] drm/syncobj: add transition iotcls between binary and timeline

2019-02-18 Thread Koenig, Christian
Hi David, well I think Lionel is testing the invalid signal order on purpose :) Anyway we really need to handle invalid order graceful here. E.g. either the same way as during CS or we abort and return an error message. I think just using the same approach as during CS ist the best we can do.

Re: [PATCH 06/11] drm/syncobj: add timeline payload query ioctl v4

2019-02-18 Thread Lionel Landwerlin
On 18/02/2019 07:28, Koenig, Christian wrote: Am 18.02.19 um 04:10 schrieb zhoucm1: On 2019年02月17日 03:22, Christian König wrote: Am 15.02.19 um 20:31 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin via amd-gfx: On 07/12/2018 09:55, Chunming Zhou wrote: user mode can query timeline payload. v2: check return value

Re: [PATCH 09/11] drm/syncobj: add transition iotcls between binary and timeline

2019-02-18 Thread Lionel Landwerlin
Thanks guys :) You mentioned that signaling out of order is illegal. Is this illegal with regard to the vulkan spec or to the syncobj implementation? I'm not finding anything in the vulkan spec that makes out of order signaling illegal. That's why I came up with this test, just verifying that

[PATCH -next] drm/radeon: remove set but not used variable 'vbi_time_out'

2019-02-18 Thread YueHaibing
Fixes gcc '-Wunused-but-set-variable' warning: drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/si_dpm.c: In function 'si_program_response_times': drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/si_dpm.c:3640:29: warning: variable 'backbias_response_time' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable] It never used since introduction. Signed-off-

Re: [PATCH 09/11] drm/syncobj: add transition iotcls between binary and timeline

2019-02-18 Thread Koenig, Christian
Am 18.02.19 um 13:07 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin: Thanks guys :) You mentioned that signaling out of order is illegal. Is this illegal with regard to the vulkan spec or to the syncobj implementation? David is the expert on that, but as far as I know that is forbidden by the vulkan spec. I'm not f

Re: [PATCH 1/1] [RFC] drm/ttm: Don't init dma32_zone on 64-bit systems

2019-02-18 Thread Christian König
Am 18.02.19 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellstrom: On Mon, 2019-02-18 at 09:20 +, Koenig, Christian wrote: Another good question is also why the heck the acc_size counts towards the DMA32 zone? DMA32 TTM pages are accounted in the DMA32 zone. Other pages are not. Yeah, I'm perfectly aware of

Re: [PATCH 1/1] [RFC] drm/ttm: Don't init dma32_zone on 64-bit systems

2019-02-18 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
On Mon, 2019-02-18 at 18:07 +0100, Christian König wrote: > Am 18.02.19 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellstrom: > > On Mon, 2019-02-18 at 09:20 +, Koenig, Christian wrote: > > > Another good question is also why the heck the acc_size counts > > > towards > > > the DMA32 zone? > > DMA32 TTM pages are

[PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Set DPM_FLAG_NEVER_SKIP when enabling PM-runtime

2019-02-18 Thread Alex Deucher
Based on a similar patch from Rafael for radeon. When using ATPX to control dGPU power, the state is not retained across suspend and resume cycles by default. This can probably be loosened for Hybrid Graphics (_PR3) laptops where I think the state is properly retained. Fixes: c62ec4610c40 ("PM /

Re: [PATCH] gpu: drm: radeon: Set DPM_FLAG_NEVER_SKIP when enabling PM-runtime

2019-02-18 Thread Alex Deucher
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 4:26 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 12:37 AM Alex Deucher wrote: > > > > On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 1:01 AM Lukas Wunner wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 11:01:04AM -0500, Alex Deucher wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 10:39 AM Rafael

Re: [PATCH] drm/radeon/evergreen_cs: fix missing break in switch statement

2019-02-18 Thread Alex Deucher
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 5:40 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > Add missing break statement in order to prevent the code from falling > through to case CB_TARGET_MASK. > > This bug was found thanks to the ongoing efforts to enable > -Wimplicit-fallthrough. > > Fixes: dd220a00e8bd ("drm/radeon/kms:

[PATCH] drm/amdgpu/powerplay: add missing breaks in polaris10_smumgr

2019-02-18 Thread Alex Deucher
This was noticed by Gustavo and his -Wimplicit-fallthrough patches. However, in this case, I believe we should have breaks rather than falling though, that said, in practice we should never fall through in the first place so there should be no change in behavior. Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher ---

Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/powerplay/polaris10_smumgr: Mark expected switch fall-through

2019-02-18 Thread Alex Deucher
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:50 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch > cases where we are expecting to fall through. > > Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 > > This patch is part of the ongoing efforts to enable > -Wimplicit-

Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/powerplay/polaris10_smumgr: Mark expected switch fall-through

2019-02-18 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva
On 2/18/19 4:40 PM, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:50 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva > wrote: >> >> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch >> cases where we are expecting to fall through. >> >> Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 >> >> This patch i

RE: [PATCH libdrm] tests/amdgpu: add dispatch test

2019-02-18 Thread Zhang, Hawking
Although the shader is simple enough, please work with CQE to test it on all gfx9 ASICs before push it. The patch is Reviewed-by: Hawking Zhang Regards, Hawking -Original Message- From: amd-gfx On Behalf Of Cui, Flora Sent: 2019年2月18日 12:56 To: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; dri-de...@

[PATCH] drm/amd/powerplay: fix the confusing ppfeature mask calculations

2019-02-18 Thread Evan Quan
Simplify the ppfeature mask calculations. Change-Id: I41dee48c2ac8ed1fd7736bc8bb1f832da22cba13 Signed-off-by: Evan Quan --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/vega10_hwmgr.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/vega12_hwmgr.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/powerplay/hwmgr/vega20_hwmgr.c

RE: [PATCH] drm/amd/powerplay: fix the confusing ppfeature mask calculations

2019-02-18 Thread Feng, Kenneth
Reviewed-by: Kenneth Feng -Original Message- From: amd-gfx [mailto:amd-gfx-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Evan Quan Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 12:28 PM To: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Kuehling, Felix ; Quan, Evan Subject: [PATCH] drm/amd/powerplay: fix the confu