From: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: userspace interface to the forcewake
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 09:55:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110417165512.GA21592@lundgren.kumite> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1bdc18$k8bua6@fmsmga002.fm.intel.com>
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 08:05:42AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:56:02 +0200, Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> But Ben... I seemed to have missed the real reason why we need the
> spinlock. You have to remind me or else I will keep whining on like a
> broken record. ;-)
> -Chris
>
The reason rests on 1 major conclusion, we must make sure FORCEAWAKE
(FORCEWAKE_ACK in the code) is set prior to reading any register in the
range 0-0x3ffff. If I've misunderstood the way this works, and that is
not correct, then you can stop reading now.
The simplest case which shows why we need a spinlock is in reading IIR
(as discussed previously, including my theory why we probably don't
actually have an issue today) in the interrupt handler. We can't get
struct_mutex there, so we're forced to either bump up struct_mutex to a
spinlock, or introduce a new one.
There were one or two cases which got uncovered with the warning, which
I can't find from code inspection right now, where we write to these
registers with just config.mutex. In those cases, we could just acquire
struct_mutex after config.mutex, and that should fix those problems.
Now assuming access is synchronized, here is how I believe it should
work:
/*
* Sorry for using the register names from the doc, which differ from
* our code, but I'm writing this while reading the docs, not our code.
*/
u32 reg = IIR; // As an example
if (reg < 0x40000) {
while(!I915_READ(GTFORCEAWAKE)) {
I915_WRITE(FORCEWAKE, FWAKE2)
I915_POSTING_READ(FORCEWAKE);
gen6_gt_drain_write_fifo(); // ;)
}
}
I would honestly prefer being wrong about this :-)
Ben
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-17 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-14 18:13 forcewake v4 (now with spinlock) Ben Widawsky
2011-04-14 18:13 ` (no subject) Ben Widawsky
2011-04-14 18:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: proper use of forcewake Ben Widawsky
2011-04-14 18:13 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: reference counted forcewake Ben Widawsky
2011-04-14 19:12 ` Ben Widawsky
2011-04-16 6:52 ` Chris Wilson
2011-04-18 17:31 ` Ben Widawsky
2011-04-19 5:48 ` Chris Wilson
2011-04-19 15:12 ` Keith Packard
2011-04-14 18:13 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: userspace interface to the forcewake Ben Widawsky
2011-04-14 19:13 ` Ben Widawsky
2011-04-14 19:56 ` Paul Menzel
2011-04-16 7:05 ` Chris Wilson
2011-04-17 16:55 ` Ben Widawsky [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110417165512.GA21592@lundgren.kumite \
--to=ben@bwidawsk.net \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).