[Intel-gfx] [drm-tip:drm-tip 7/8] debug.c:undefined reference to `save_stack_trace'

2018-07-20 Thread kbuild test robot
Hi Rodrigo, It's probably a bug fix that unveils the link errors. tree: git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-tip drm-tip head: 20532651221ed29af16e2db0a7ec8b9bd482c994 commit: 315fade0d9f3edbf2592599056c8defbdd95a3ab [7/8] Merge remote-tracking branch 'drm-intel/topic/core-for-CI' into

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers

2018-07-20 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 13:50:58 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > From: Michal Hocko > > There are several blockable mmu notifiers which might sleep in > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and that is a problem for the > oom_reaper because it needs to guarantee a forward progress so it cannot > depend

Re: [Intel-gfx] [v3] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Srivatsa, Anusha
>-Original Message- >From: Vivi, Rodrigo >Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 3:59 PM >To: Srivatsa, Anusha >Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; Navare, Manasi D > >Subject: Re: [v3] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers > >On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:42:42PM -0700, Anusha

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers

2018-07-20 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:12:01 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > > Any suggestions regarding how the driver developers can test this code > > path? I don't think we presently have a way to fake an oom-killing > > event? Perhaps we should add such a thing, given the problems we're > > having with that

Re: [Intel-gfx] [v3] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:42:42PM -0700, Anusha Srivatsa wrote: > This patch fixes the commit - > <2efbb2f099fb> ("i915/dp/dsc: Add DSC PPS register definitions"), > which did not have _MMIO() for DSCA and DSCC. > > v2: Fix typos. (manasi) > > v3: Change the commit message (Rodrigo) > > Cc:

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers (rev3)

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers (rev3) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46979/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4521 -> Patchwork_9741 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No regressions found.

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [CI,1/2] drm/i915/dp: Limit link training clock recovery loop

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: series starting with [CI,1/2] drm/i915/dp: Limit link training clock recovery loop URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46992/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4521 -> Patchwork_9740 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No

[Intel-gfx] [v3] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Anusha Srivatsa
This patch fixes the commit - <2efbb2f099fb> ("i915/dp/dsc: Add DSC PPS register definitions"), which did not have _MMIO() for DSCA and DSCC. v2: Fix typos. (manasi) v3: Change the commit message (Rodrigo) Cc: Rodrigi Vivi Cc: Manasi Navare Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa Reviewed-by: Manasi

[Intel-gfx] [CI 1/2] drm/i915/dp: Limit link training clock recovery loop

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
From: Nathan Ciobanu Limit the link training clock recovery loop to 10 attempts at LANEx_CR_DONE per DP 1.4 spec section 3.5.1.2.2 and 80 attempts for pre-DP 1.4 (4 voltage levels x 4 preemphasis levels x x 5 identical voltages tries). Some faulty USB-C MST hubs can cause us to get stuck in this

[Intel-gfx] [CI 2/2] drm/i915/dp: Refactor max_vswing_tries variable

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
From: Nathan Ciobanu Changes the type and renames the max_vswing_tries variable which was declared as an integer but used as a boolean making it easy to be confused with a counter. Changes in v2: - updated the title and commit message - left the loop exit point in place v3: fix typo in

Re: [Intel-gfx] Can recent i915 support more than 8192x8192 screen?

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:01:38PM +0200, Marcin Owsiany wrote: >2018-07-20 22:22 GMT+02:00 Rodrigo Vivi <[1]rodrigo.v...@intel.com>: > >On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:31:19PM +0200, Marcin Owsiany wrote: >> $ xrandr --fb 8960x2880 >> xrandr: screen cannot be larger than

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Show debugfs dpcd read failure directly

2018-07-20 Thread Dhinakaran Pandiyan
On Fri, 2018-07-20 at 10:41 -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > Instead of using a backchannel if some dpcd read failed we > can show that directly on debugfs output. > > We are not returning an error because we might still want > to know if sub-sequent reads works, We can print partial ( and

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix psr sink status report.

2018-07-20 Thread Dhinakaran Pandiyan
On Fri, 2018-07-20 at 10:38 -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 06:52:00PM -0700, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 17:31 -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > > > > > First of all don't try to read dpcd if PSR is not even supported. > > > > > > But also, if

Re: [Intel-gfx] Can recent i915 support more than 8192x8192 screen?

2018-07-20 Thread Marcin Owsiany
2018-07-20 22:22 GMT+02:00 Rodrigo Vivi : > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:31:19PM +0200, Marcin Owsiany wrote: > > $ xrandr --fb 8960x2880 > > xrandr: screen cannot be larger than 8192x8192 (desired size > >8960x2880) > > I'm afraid that it is a hardware limitation that you won't be able

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v6] drm/i915/dp: Limit link training clock recovery loop

2018-07-20 Thread Nathan Ciobanu
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 01:28:44PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 01:15:59PM -0700, Nathan Ciobanu wrote: > > Limit the link training clock recovery loop to 10 attempts at > > LANEx_CR_DONE per DP 1.4 spec section 3.5.1.2.2 and 80 attempts for > > pre-DP 1.4 (4 voltage levels

Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Srivatsa, Anusha
>-Original Message- >From: Vivi, Rodrigo >Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 1:37 PM >To: Srivatsa, Anusha >Cc: Navare, Manasi D ; intel- >g...@lists.freedesktop.org >Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS >registers > >On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 08:28:01PM

Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 08:28:01PM +, Srivatsa, Anusha wrote: > > > >-Original Message- > >From: Navare, Manasi D > >Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 1:29 PM > >To: Vivi, Rodrigo > >Cc: Srivatsa, Anusha ; intel- > >g...@lists.freedesktop.org > >Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc:

Re: [Intel-gfx] Something is breaking the driver for me

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 06:13:54PM +0200, Jamesie Pic wrote: >Hello everybody ! >Sorry but I'm really a noob and I got nowhere to turn to. >I have a lenevo thinkpad x270 on an ultra-dock with 3 external >monitors: >00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation HD

Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Srivatsa, Anusha
>-Original Message- >From: Navare, Manasi D >Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 1:29 PM >To: Vivi, Rodrigo >Cc: Srivatsa, Anusha ; intel- >g...@lists.freedesktop.org >Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS >registers > >On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 01:13:07PM

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v6] drm/i915/dp: Limit link training clock recovery loop

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 01:15:59PM -0700, Nathan Ciobanu wrote: > Limit the link training clock recovery loop to 10 attempts at > LANEx_CR_DONE per DP 1.4 spec section 3.5.1.2.2 and 80 attempts for > pre-DP 1.4 (4 voltage levels x 4 preemphasis levels x > x 5 identical voltages tries). Some faulty

Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Manasi Navare
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 01:13:07PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:25:47PM -0700, Manasi Navare wrote: > > Looks good to me now and also tested with the patches that use these > > registers. > > > > Reviewed-by: Manasi Navare > > > > Manasi > > > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 1/2] drm/i915/dp: Limit link training clock recovery loop

2018-07-20 Thread Nathan Ciobanu
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:22:15PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 02:47:38PM -0700, Nathan Ciobanu wrote: > > Limit the link training clock recovery loop to 10 attempts at > > LANEx_CR_DONE per DP 1.4 spec section 3.5.1.2.2 and 80 attempts for > > pre-DP 1.4 (4 voltage levels

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v6] drm/i915/dp: Limit link training clock recovery loop

2018-07-20 Thread Nathan Ciobanu
Limit the link training clock recovery loop to 10 attempts at LANEx_CR_DONE per DP 1.4 spec section 3.5.1.2.2 and 80 attempts for pre-DP 1.4 (4 voltage levels x 4 preemphasis levels x x 5 identical voltages tries). Some faulty USB-C MST hubs can cause us to get stuck in this loop indefinitely

Re: [Intel-gfx] Can recent i915 support more than 8192x8192 screen?

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:31:19PM +0200, Marcin Owsiany wrote: >Hello, >TL;DR: how can I set a 8960x2880 screen (not display) size on a T580? A >patch for i915 that I found on the internets does not seem to work. >Full story: >I'm a rather happy user of ThinkPad T580 which

Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:25:47PM -0700, Manasi Navare wrote: > Looks good to me now and also tested with the patches that use these > registers. > > Reviewed-by: Manasi Navare > > Manasi > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:10:39PM -0700, Anusha Srivatsa wrote: > > FIXME: This fixes the patch:

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers (rev2)

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers (rev2) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46979/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4521 -> Patchwork_9739 = == Summary - WARNING == Minor unknown changes coming

Re: [Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Manasi Navare
Looks good to me now and also tested with the patches that use these registers. Reviewed-by: Manasi Navare Manasi On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:10:39PM -0700, Anusha Srivatsa wrote: > FIXME: This fixes the patch: > Link: >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 1/2] drm/i915/dp: Limit link training clock recovery loop

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 02:47:38PM -0700, Nathan Ciobanu wrote: > Limit the link training clock recovery loop to 10 attempts at > LANEx_CR_DONE per DP 1.4 spec section 3.5.1.2.2 and 80 attempts for > pre-DP 1.4 (4 voltage levels x 4 preemphasis levels x > x 5 identical voltages tries). Some faulty

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Show debugfs dpcd read failure directly

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915: Show debugfs dpcd read failure directly URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46977/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4521 -> Patchwork_9737 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No regressions found. External URL:

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [v5] drm/i915/dp: Refactor max_vswing_tries variable (rev3)

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: series starting with [v5] drm/i915/dp: Refactor max_vswing_tries variable (rev3) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46897/ State : failure == Summary == Applying: drm/i915/dp: Refactor max_vswing_tries variable error: sha1 information is lacking or

[Intel-gfx] [v2] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Anusha Srivatsa
FIXME: This fixes the patch: Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1531861861-10950-2-git-send-email-anusha.sriva...@intel.com Which did not have _MMIO() for DSCA and DSCC. v2: Fix typos. (manasi) Cc: Rodrigi Vivi Cc: Manasi Navare Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa ---

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5] drm/i915/dp: Refactor max_vswing_tries variable

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:23:43AM -0700, Nathan Ciobanu wrote: > Changes the type and renames the max_vswing_tries variable > which was declared as an integer but used as a boolean > making it easy to be confused with a counter. > > Changes in v2: > - updated the title and commit message >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Manasi Navare
There are more typos in this patch as below that need to be fixed: On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:04:38AM -0700, Anusha Srivatsa wrote: > FIXME: This fixes the patch: > Link: > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1531861861-10950-2-git-send-email-anusha.sriva...@intel.com > > Which did

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [1/2] drm/dp: add extended receiver capability field present bit

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: series starting with [1/2] drm/dp: add extended receiver capability field present bit URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46965/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4521 -> Patchwork_9736 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 2/2] drm/i915/dp: Refactor mav_vswing_tries variable

2018-07-20 Thread Nathan Ciobanu
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 01:19:02PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 02:48:07PM -0700, Nathan Ciobanu wrote: > > Changes the type and renames the max_vswing_tries variable > > which was declared as an integer but used as a boolean > > making it easy to be confused with a

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5] drm/i915/dp: Refactor max_vswing_tries variable

2018-07-20 Thread Nathan Ciobanu
Changes the type and renames the max_vswing_tries variable which was declared as an integer but used as a boolean making it easy to be confused with a counter. Changes in v2: - updated the title and commit message - left the loop exit point in place v3: fix typo in title v4: renamed

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dsc: Add missing _MMIO() from PPS registers

2018-07-20 Thread Anusha Srivatsa
FIXME: This fixes the patch: Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1531861861-10950-2-git-send-email-anusha.sriva...@intel.com Which did not have _MMIO() for DSCA and DSCC. Cc: Rodrigi Vivi Cc: Manasi Navare Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h |

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: implement EXTENDED_RECEIVER_CAPABILITY_FIELD_PRESENT

2018-07-20 Thread Manasi Navare
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 09:18:12AM -0700, matthew.s.atw...@intel.com wrote: > From: Matt Atwood > > According to DP spec (2.9.3.1 of DP 1.4) if > EXTENDED_RECEIVER_CAPABILITY_FIELD_PRESENT is set the addresses in DPCD > 02200h through 0220Fh shall contain the DPRX's true capability. These >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: implement EXTENDED_RECEIVER_CAPABILITY_FIELD_PRESENT

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 09:18:12AM -0700, matthew.s.atw...@intel.com wrote: > From: Matt Atwood > > According to DP spec (2.9.3.1 of DP 1.4) if > EXTENDED_RECEIVER_CAPABILITY_FIELD_PRESENT is set the addresses in DPCD > 02200h through 0220Fh shall contain the DPRX's true capability. These >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/dp: add extended receiver capability field present bit

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 09:18:11AM -0700, matthew.s.atw...@intel.com wrote: > From: Matt Atwood > > This bit was added to DP Training Aux RD interval with DP 1.3. Via > descriptiion of the spec this field indicates the panels true > capabilities are described in DPCD address space 02200h through

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Remove unused "ret" variable.

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:56:33PM -0700, Nathan Ciobanu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:16:03PM -0700, Nathan Ciobanu wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 04:42:17PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > > Just a small clean-up with no functional change, only > > > removing a variable that is never

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Show debugfs dpcd read failure directly

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
Instead of using a backchannel if some dpcd read failed we can show that directly on debugfs output. We are not returning an error because we might still want to know if sub-sequent reads works, but we shouldn't need to check 2 places to see why reg is not on the list. Cc: Jani Nikula Cc:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix psr sink status report.

2018-07-20 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 06:52:00PM -0700, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 17:31 -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > First of all don't try to read dpcd if PSR is not even supported. > > > > But also, if read failed return -EIO instead of reporting via a > > backchannel. > > > > v2:

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Fix psr sink status report. (rev3)

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915: Fix psr sink status report. (rev3) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46831/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4519 -> Patchwork_9735 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No regressions found. External URL:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Only force GGTT coherency w/a on required chipsets

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 16:13:14) > > On 20/07/2018 11:19, Chris Wilson wrote: > > +/* > > + * Once upon a time we supposed that writes through the GGTT would be > > + * immediately in physical memory (once flushed out of the CPU path). > > However, > > + * on a few different

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/dp: add extended receiver capability field present bit

2018-07-20 Thread matthew . s . atwood
From: Matt Atwood This bit was added to DP Training Aux RD interval with DP 1.3. Via descriptiion of the spec this field indicates the panels true capabilities are described in DPCD address space 02200h through 022FFh. v2: version comment update v3: version comment correction, commit message

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: implement EXTENDED_RECEIVER_CAPABILITY_FIELD_PRESENT

2018-07-20 Thread matthew . s . atwood
From: Matt Atwood According to DP spec (2.9.3.1 of DP 1.4) if EXTENDED_RECEIVER_CAPABILITY_FIELD_PRESENT is set the addresses in DPCD 02200h through 0220Fh shall contain the DPRX's true capability. These values will match 0h through Fh, except for DPCD_REV, MAX_LINK_RATE,

[Intel-gfx] Something is breaking the driver for me

2018-07-20 Thread Jamesie Pic
Hello everybody ! Sorry but I'm really a noob and I got nowhere to turn to. I have a lenevo thinkpad x270 on an ultra-dock with 3 external monitors: 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation HD Graphics 620 (rev 02) Since last week's updates in Arch linux, I'm having issues with the

[Intel-gfx] Can recent i915 support more than 8192x8192 screen?

2018-07-20 Thread Marcin Owsiany
Hello, *TL;DR*: how can I set a 8960x2880 screen (not display) size on a T580? A patch for i915 that I found on the internets does not seem to work. Full story: I'm a rather happy user of ThinkPad T580 which comes with a high-density 3840x2160 LCD, and the following graphics hardware. 00:02.0

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCHv3] lib/ratelimit: Lockless ratelimiting

2018-07-20 Thread Petr Mladek
On Wed 2018-07-18 19:49:10, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > I would be glad if someone helps/bothers to review the change :C > > > > Perhaps Petr and / or Steven can help you. > > Thanks, > > Dmitry > > > > On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 23:56 +0100,

Re: [Intel-gfx] [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_mmap_gtt: Check for known incoherency before testing

2018-07-20 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
On 20/07/2018 09:07, Chris Wilson wrote: We test map_gtt coherency (whether or not a write via the mmap_gtt is immediately visible in the backing storage to a read via mmap_cpu) but we know that several platforms are inherently incorrect and require some form of hammer to workaround internal

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCHv3] lib/ratelimit: Lockless ratelimiting

2018-07-20 Thread Dmitry Safonov
On Fri, 2018-07-20 at 17:09 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 23:56 +0100, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > Currently ratelimit_state is protected with spin_lock. If the > > > > .lock > > > > is > > > > taken at the moment of ___ratelimit() call, the message is > > > > suppressed

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Only force GGTT coherency w/a on required chipsets

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 16:27:20) > > On 20/07/2018 16:21, Chris Wilson wrote: > > My only plan is for igt to know when the tests are expected to fail. > > Real userspace should not be using GTT, it is slow (even slower than > > intended ;) and constrained, so subject to aperture

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Only force GGTT coherency w/a on required chipsets

2018-07-20 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
On 20/07/2018 16:21, Chris Wilson wrote: Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 16:13:14) On 20/07/2018 11:19, Chris Wilson wrote: Not all chipsets have an internal buffer delaying the visibility of writes via the GGTT being visible by other physical paths, but we use a very heavy workaround for

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Only force GGTT coherency w/a on required chipsets

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 16:13:14) > > On 20/07/2018 11:19, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Not all chipsets have an internal buffer delaying the visibility of > > writes via the GGTT being visible by other physical paths, but we use a > > very heavy workaround for all. We only need to apply

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Clean up power well descriptors

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915: Clean up power well descriptors URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46952/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4518 -> Patchwork_9734 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No regressions found. External URL:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Only force GGTT coherency w/a on required chipsets

2018-07-20 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
On 20/07/2018 11:19, Chris Wilson wrote: Not all chipsets have an internal buffer delaying the visibility of writes via the GGTT being visible by other physical paths, but we use a very heavy workaround for all. We only need to apply that workarounds to the chipsets we know suffer from the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 1/5] drm/i915/guc: Avoid wasting memory on incorrect GuC pin bias

2018-07-20 Thread Michał Winiarski
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 03:33:51PM +0200, Jakub Bartmiński wrote: > It would appear that the calculated GuC pin bias was larger than it > should be, as the GuC address space does NOT contain the "HW contexts RSVD" > part of the WOPCM. Thus, the GuC pin bias is simply the GuC WOPCM size. > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 15:58:51) > True, it only catches the imbalance in one direction quickly. If suspend > idea works go with that, but what's so bad about some log messages? > Assuming leak towards the overflow direction on each flip it could be > reached in ~18 hours which is

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Suppress assertion for i915_ggtt_disable_guc

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Michał Winiarski (2018-07-20 15:57:49) > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:51:44AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Another step in the drv_module_reload fault-injection saga, is that we > > try to disable the guc twice. Probably. It's a little unclear exactly > > what is going on in the unload

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
On 20/07/2018 14:59, Chris Wilson wrote: Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 14:29:52) On 20/07/2018 14:02, Chris Wilson wrote: Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 13:49:09) On 12/07/2018 18:38, Chris Wilson wrote: + if (rps->interactive) + new_power = HIGH_POWER; +

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Suppress assertion for i915_ggtt_disable_guc

2018-07-20 Thread Michał Winiarski
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:51:44AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Another step in the drv_module_reload fault-injection saga, is that we > try to disable the guc twice. Probably. It's a little unclear exactly > what is going on in the unload sequence that catches us out, so for the > time being

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for drm/i915: Clean up power well descriptors

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915: Clean up power well descriptors URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46952/ State : warning == Summary == $ dim sparse origin/drm-tip Commit: drm/i915/icl: Fix power well anonymous union initializers Okay! Commit: drm/i915: Rename

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Only force GGTT coherency w/a on required chipsets

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Lis, Tomasz (2018-07-20 15:41:33) > > > On 2018-07-20 12:19, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Not all chipsets have an internal buffer delaying the visibility of > > writes via the GGTT being visible by other physical paths, but we use a > > very heavy workaround for all. We only need to apply

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: Clean up power well descriptors

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915: Clean up power well descriptors URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46952/ State : warning == Summary == $ dim checkpatch origin/drm-tip b6af654513ed drm/i915/icl: Fix power well anonymous union initializers -:7: WARNING:COMMIT_LOG_LONG_LINE:

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] lib/pm: Fix some runtime PM issues

2018-07-20 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
From: Tvrtko Ursulin 1. It seems that on many systems the hardcoded PCI path in igt_pm_audio_setup_runtime_pm is not correct. Add some more paths to work around the issue. More robust solution would be to look for a symlink of a specific format and use that, such as: # ls -ld

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Only force GGTT coherency w/a on required chipsets

2018-07-20 Thread Lis, Tomasz
On 2018-07-20 12:19, Chris Wilson wrote: Not all chipsets have an internal buffer delaying the visibility of writes via the GGTT being visible by other physical paths, but we use a very heavy workaround for all. We only need to apply that workarounds to the chipsets we know suffer from the

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success for drm/i915: Suppress assertion for i915_ggtt_disable_guc

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915: Suppress assertion for i915_ggtt_disable_guc URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46930/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4518_full -> Patchwork_9728_full = == Summary - WARNING == Minor unknown changes

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 03:03:09PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:50:25) > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:38:32PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:32:40) > > > > Another question is what happens where there are parallel flips >

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/10] drm/i915/vlv: Use power well CTL IDX instead of ID

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
Atm, we determine the control/status flag offsets within the PUNIT control/status registers based on the power well's ID. Since the power well ID enum is global across all platforms, the associated macros to get the flag offsets involves some magic. This makes checking the register/bit definitions

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 02/10] drm/i915: Rename intel_power_domains_fini() to intel_power_domains_fini_hw()

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
intel_power_domains_fini() rolls back what was done in intel_power_domains_init_hw(), so rename and move it accordingly. This allows us adding a cleanup function later for intel_power_domains_init() in a cleaner way. No functional change. Cc: Ville Syrjala Cc: Paulo Zanoni Cc: Jani Nikula

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/10] drm/i915: Clean up power well descriptors

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
Paulo noted that the complexity in the macros for determining the power well register and request/status HW flag offsets is overly complicated. This patchset improves on that by removing the dependence on the power well ID enum when determining these and instead defining the correpsonding power

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 09/10] drm/i915: Use existing power well IDs where possible

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
There is no need for separate IDs for power wells on a new platform with the same functionality as an other power well on a previous platform, we can just reuse the ID from the previous platform. This is only possible after the previous patches where we removed dependence on the actual enum

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 08/10] drm/i915: Make power well ID names more uniform

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
The format for the ID names is _DISP_PW_* so rename the IDs not following this accordingly. Leave BXT_DPIO_CMN_BC as-is since we'll change that to use another existing ID in the next patch. Cc: Ville Syrjala Cc: Paulo Zanoni Cc: Jani Nikula Signed-off-by: Imre Deak ---

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 06/10] drm/i915/ddi: Use power well CTL IDX instead of ID

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
Similarly to the previous patch use a separate request/status HW flag index defined right after the corresponding control registers instead of depending for this on the power well IDs. Since the set of control/status registers varies among the different power wells (on a single platform), also add

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 10/10] drm/i915/icl: Add missing power gate enums

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
On ICL there are 5 fused power gates, so add the two missing ones for clarity. Cc: Ville Syrjala Cc: Paulo Zanoni Cc: Jani Nikula Signed-off-by: Imre Deak --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/10] drm/i915: Remove redundant power well IDs

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
Now that we removed dependence on the power well IDs to determine the control register and request/status flag offsets the only purpose of power well IDs is to look up power wells directly bypassing the power domains framework. However this direct lookup isn't needed for most of the exisiting

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 03/10] drm/i915/vlv: Remove redundant power well ID asserts

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
The callbacks these asserts are called from are used from a single power well, so not much point in checking that. The check also requires a unique power well ID that we would need to keep around only for this purpose. (A follow-up patch removes power well IDs not needed for direct power well

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 04/10] drm/i915: Constify power well descriptors

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
It makes sense to keep unchanging data const. Extract such fields from the i915_power_well struct into a new i915_power_well_desc struct that we initialize during compile time. For the rest of the dynamic fields allocate an array of i915_power_well objects in i915 dev_priv, and link to each of

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/10] drm/i915/icl: Fix power well anonymous union initializers

2018-07-20 Thread Imre Deak
Similarly to 0a445945be6d ("drm/i915: Work around GCC anonymous union initialization bug") we need to initialize anonymous unions inside extra braces to work around a GCC4.4 build error. Cc: Chris Wilson Cc: Ville Syrjala Cc: Paulo Zanoni Cc: Jani Nikula Signed-off-by: Imre Deak ---

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [v4,1/5] drm/i915/guc: Avoid wasting memory on incorrect GuC pin bias

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: series starting with [v4,1/5] drm/i915/guc: Avoid wasting memory on incorrect GuC pin bias URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46949/ State : failure == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4518 -> Patchwork_9733 = == Summary - FAILURE ==

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] lib/pm: Fix some runtime PM issues

2018-07-20 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
From: Tvrtko Ursulin 1. It seems that on many systems the hardcoded PCI path in igt_pm_audio_setup_runtime_pm is not correct. Add some more paths to work around the issue. More robust solution would be to look for a symlink of a specific format and use that, such as: # ls -ld

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:50:25) > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:38:32PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:32:40) > > > Another question is what happens where there are parallel flips > > > happening? One could undo the boost from the other AFAICS. But

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 14:29:52) > > On 20/07/2018 14:02, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 13:49:09) > >> > >> On 12/07/2018 18:38, Chris Wilson wrote: > >>> + if (rps->interactive) > >>> + new_power = HIGH_POWER; > >>> +

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:38:32PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:32:40) > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:14:11PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:07:31) > > > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:02:34PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > >

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for series starting with [v4,1/5] drm/i915/guc: Avoid wasting memory on incorrect GuC pin bias

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: series starting with [v4,1/5] drm/i915/guc: Avoid wasting memory on incorrect GuC pin bias URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46949/ State : warning == Summary == $ dim sparse origin/drm-tip Commit: drm/i915/guc: Avoid wasting memory on incorrect GuC

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:32:40) > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:14:11PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:07:31) > > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:02:34PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Doing this kind of global thing from the plane hooks seems a bit > >

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 2/5] drm/i915/guc: Move the pin bias value from GuC to GGTT

2018-07-20 Thread Jakub Bartmiński
Removing the pin bias from GuC allows us to not check for GuC every time we pin a context, which fixes the assertion error on unresolved GuC platform default in mock contexts selftest. It also seems that we were using uninitialized WOPCM variables when setting the GuC pin bias. The pin bias has

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 3/5] drm/i915: Remove unnecessary ggtt_offset_bias from i915_gem_context

2018-07-20 Thread Jakub Bartmiński
Since ggtt_offset_bias is now stored in ggtt.pin_bias, it is duplicated inside i915_gem_context, and can instead be accessed directly from ggtt. v3: Added a helper function to retrieve the ggtt.pin_bias from the vma. v4: Moved the helper function to the previous patch in the series. Dropped the

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 5/5] HAX enable GuC for CI

2018-07-20 Thread Jakub Bartmiński
From: Michal Wajdeczko Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h index aebe0469ddaa..3e4e128237ac 100644 ---

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 4/5] drm/i915: Add a fault injection point to WOPCM init

2018-07-20 Thread Jakub Bartmiński
v4: Move the injection inside the WOPCM init. Signed-off-by: Jakub Bartmiński Cc: Chris Wilson Cc: Michał Winiarski Cc: Michal Wajdeczko --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wopcm.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wopcm.c

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 1/5] drm/i915/guc: Avoid wasting memory on incorrect GuC pin bias

2018-07-20 Thread Jakub Bartmiński
It would appear that the calculated GuC pin bias was larger than it should be, as the GuC address space does NOT contain the "HW contexts RSVD" part of the WOPCM. Thus, the GuC pin bias is simply the GuC WOPCM size. Signed-off-by: Jakub Bartmiński Cc: Chris Wilson Cc: Michał Winiarski Cc:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:14:11PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:07:31) > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:02:34PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Doing this kind of global thing from the plane hooks seems a bit > > strange. How about just doing this directly from

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
On 20/07/2018 14:02, Chris Wilson wrote: Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 13:49:09) On 12/07/2018 18:38, Chris Wilson wrote: diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c index 7998e70a3174..5809366ff9f0 100644 ---

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2018-07-20 14:07:31) > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:02:34PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Doing this kind of global thing from the plane hooks seems a bit > strange. How about just doing this directly from commit_tail() > etc.? We want it upfront in prepare (so that it's set

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:02:34PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 13:49:09) > > > > On 12/07/2018 18:38, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > > index

[Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Show stack (by WARN) for hitting forcewake errors

2018-07-20 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915: Show stack (by WARN) for hitting forcewake errors URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/46939/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4518 -> Patchwork_9732 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No regressions found.

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-20 13:49:09) > > On 12/07/2018 18:38, Chris Wilson wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > index 7998e70a3174..5809366ff9f0 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > +++

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/12] dmar: Use for_each_If

2018-07-20 Thread Joerg Roedel
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:36:43AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > #define for_each_active_drhd_unit(drhd) > \ > list_for_each_entry_rcu(drhd, _drhd_units, list) \ > - if (drhd->ignored) {} else > + for_each_if

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND] drm/i915: Interactive RPS mode

2018-07-20 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
On 12/07/2018 18:38, Chris Wilson wrote: RPS provides a feedback loop where we use the load during the previous evaluation interval to decide whether to up or down clock the GPU frequency. Our responsiveness is split into 3 regimes, a high and low plateau with the intent to keep the gpu clocked

  1   2   >