* [PATCH] drm/nouveau/acpi: de-dup use of DSM methods
@ 2013-08-01 14:41 Peter Wu
2013-08-02 5:58 ` Dave Airlie
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Peter Wu @ 2013-08-01 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Airlie; +Cc: Peter Wu, dri-devel
Observe that nouveau_optimus_dsm and nouveau_dsm are equal except for
the parameters handling (UUID, revision ID and function arguments). The
function arguments are passed as Buffer in the "optimus dsm" and Integer
in "nvidia dsm". As buffers are implicitly converted to integers, merge
both functions.
The ACPI spec defines the fourth parameter (Arg3 a.k.a. "function
arguments") as Package, but many BIOSes expect a Buffer instead. For
instance, for the "nvidia DSM", the Lenovo T410s uses CreateByteField on
Arg3 which does not work with a package. The Clevo B7130 does something
similar for the "Optimus DSM". Unfortunately, this means that the
following ACPI warning (introduced with 29a241c) cannot be fixed (when
toggling power or muxing):
ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)
ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)
ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.P0P2.PEGP._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)
ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.P0P2.PEGP._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)
Signed-off-by: Peter Wu <lekensteyn@gmail.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c | 67 ++++++++++------------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
index d97f200..a75684f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
@@ -46,6 +46,9 @@ bool nouveau_is_v1_dsm(void) {
#define NOUVEAU_DSM_HAS_MUX 0x1
#define NOUVEAU_DSM_HAS_OPT 0x2
+#define NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_NVIDIA 0x102
+#define NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_OPTIMUS 0x100
+
static const char nouveau_dsm_muid[] = {
0xA0, 0xA0, 0x95, 0x9D, 0x60, 0x00, 0x48, 0x4D,
0xB3, 0x4D, 0x7E, 0x5F, 0xEA, 0x12, 0x9F, 0xD4,
@@ -56,7 +59,8 @@ static const char nouveau_op_dsm_muid[] = {
0xA7, 0x2B, 0x60, 0x42, 0xA6, 0xB5, 0xBE, 0xE0,
};
-static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
+static int nouveau_call_dsm(acpi_handle handle, const char *uuid, int revid,
+ int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
{
struct acpi_buffer output = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
struct acpi_object_list input;
@@ -68,12 +72,15 @@ static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *
input.count = 4;
input.pointer = params;
params[0].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
- params[0].buffer.length = sizeof(nouveau_op_dsm_muid);
- params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)nouveau_op_dsm_muid;
+ params[0].buffer.length = 16;
+ params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)uuid;
params[1].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
- params[1].integer.value = 0x00000100;
+ params[1].integer.value = revid;
params[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
params[2].integer.value = func;
+ /* Although the ACPI spec defines Arg3 as a Package, in practise
+ * implementations expect a Buffer (CreateWordField and Index functions
+ * are applied to it). */
params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
params[3].buffer.length = 4;
/* ACPI is little endian, AABBCCDD becomes {DD,CC,BB,AA} */
@@ -108,50 +115,16 @@ static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *
return 0;
}
-static int nouveau_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
-{
- struct acpi_buffer output = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
- struct acpi_object_list input;
- union acpi_object params[4];
- union acpi_object *obj;
- int err;
-
- input.count = 4;
- input.pointer = params;
- params[0].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
- params[0].buffer.length = sizeof(nouveau_dsm_muid);
- params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)nouveau_dsm_muid;
- params[1].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
- params[1].integer.value = 0x00000102;
- params[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
- params[2].integer.value = func;
- params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
- params[3].integer.value = arg;
-
- err = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
- if (err) {
- printk(KERN_INFO "failed to evaluate _DSM: %d\n", err);
- return err;
- }
-
- obj = (union acpi_object *)output.pointer;
-
- if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER)
- if (obj->integer.value == 0x80000002)
- return -ENODEV;
-
- if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER) {
- if (obj->buffer.length == 4 && result) {
- *result = 0;
- *result |= obj->buffer.pointer[0];
- *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[1] << 8);
- *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[2] << 16);
- *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[3] << 24);
- }
- }
+static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func,
+ int arg, uint32_t *result) {
+ return nouveau_call_dsm(handle, nouveau_op_dsm_muid,
+ NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_OPTIMUS, func, arg, result);
+}
- kfree(output.pointer);
- return 0;
+static int nouveau_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func,
+ int arg, uint32_t *result) {
+ return nouveau_call_dsm(handle, nouveau_dsm_muid,
+ NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_NVIDIA, func, arg, result);
}
/* Returns 1 if a DSM function is usable and 0 otherwise */
--
1.8.3.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau/acpi: de-dup use of DSM methods
2013-08-01 14:41 [PATCH] drm/nouveau/acpi: de-dup use of DSM methods Peter Wu
@ 2013-08-02 5:58 ` Dave Airlie
2013-08-02 7:41 ` Peter Wu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dave Airlie @ 2013-08-02 5:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Peter Wu; +Cc: Dave Airlie, dri-devel
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Peter Wu <lekensteyn@gmail.com> wrote:
> Observe that nouveau_optimus_dsm and nouveau_dsm are equal except for
> the parameters handling (UUID, revision ID and function arguments). The
> function arguments are passed as Buffer in the "optimus dsm" and Integer
> in "nvidia dsm". As buffers are implicitly converted to integers, merge
> both functions.
>
> The ACPI spec defines the fourth parameter (Arg3 a.k.a. "function
> arguments") as Package, but many BIOSes expect a Buffer instead. For
> instance, for the "nvidia DSM", the Lenovo T410s uses CreateByteField on
> Arg3 which does not work with a package. The Clevo B7130 does something
> similar for the "Optimus DSM". Unfortunately, this means that the
> following ACPI warning (introduced with 29a241c) cannot be fixed (when
> toggling power or muxing):
By cannot be fixed, why is it there then? maybe ask the ACPI folks to
drop this error, since as far as I can see all optimus dsm want a
buffer here.
Dave.
>
> ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)
> ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)
> ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.P0P2.PEGP._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)
> ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.P0P2.PEGP._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Wu <lekensteyn@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c | 67 ++++++++++------------------------
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> index d97f200..a75684f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> @@ -46,6 +46,9 @@ bool nouveau_is_v1_dsm(void) {
> #define NOUVEAU_DSM_HAS_MUX 0x1
> #define NOUVEAU_DSM_HAS_OPT 0x2
>
> +#define NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_NVIDIA 0x102
> +#define NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_OPTIMUS 0x100
> +
> static const char nouveau_dsm_muid[] = {
> 0xA0, 0xA0, 0x95, 0x9D, 0x60, 0x00, 0x48, 0x4D,
> 0xB3, 0x4D, 0x7E, 0x5F, 0xEA, 0x12, 0x9F, 0xD4,
> @@ -56,7 +59,8 @@ static const char nouveau_op_dsm_muid[] = {
> 0xA7, 0x2B, 0x60, 0x42, 0xA6, 0xB5, 0xBE, 0xE0,
> };
>
> -static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
> +static int nouveau_call_dsm(acpi_handle handle, const char *uuid, int revid,
> + int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
> {
> struct acpi_buffer output = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> struct acpi_object_list input;
> @@ -68,12 +72,15 @@ static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *
> input.count = 4;
> input.pointer = params;
> params[0].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
> - params[0].buffer.length = sizeof(nouveau_op_dsm_muid);
> - params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)nouveau_op_dsm_muid;
> + params[0].buffer.length = 16;
> + params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)uuid;
> params[1].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> - params[1].integer.value = 0x00000100;
> + params[1].integer.value = revid;
> params[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> params[2].integer.value = func;
> + /* Although the ACPI spec defines Arg3 as a Package, in practise
> + * implementations expect a Buffer (CreateWordField and Index functions
> + * are applied to it). */
> params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
> params[3].buffer.length = 4;
> /* ACPI is little endian, AABBCCDD becomes {DD,CC,BB,AA} */
> @@ -108,50 +115,16 @@ static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int nouveau_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
> -{
> - struct acpi_buffer output = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> - struct acpi_object_list input;
> - union acpi_object params[4];
> - union acpi_object *obj;
> - int err;
> -
> - input.count = 4;
> - input.pointer = params;
> - params[0].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
> - params[0].buffer.length = sizeof(nouveau_dsm_muid);
> - params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)nouveau_dsm_muid;
> - params[1].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> - params[1].integer.value = 0x00000102;
> - params[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> - params[2].integer.value = func;
> - params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> - params[3].integer.value = arg;
> -
> - err = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
> - if (err) {
> - printk(KERN_INFO "failed to evaluate _DSM: %d\n", err);
> - return err;
> - }
> -
> - obj = (union acpi_object *)output.pointer;
> -
> - if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER)
> - if (obj->integer.value == 0x80000002)
> - return -ENODEV;
> -
> - if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER) {
> - if (obj->buffer.length == 4 && result) {
> - *result = 0;
> - *result |= obj->buffer.pointer[0];
> - *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[1] << 8);
> - *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[2] << 16);
> - *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[3] << 24);
> - }
> - }
> +static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func,
> + int arg, uint32_t *result) {
> + return nouveau_call_dsm(handle, nouveau_op_dsm_muid,
> + NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_OPTIMUS, func, arg, result);
> +}
>
> - kfree(output.pointer);
> - return 0;
> +static int nouveau_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func,
> + int arg, uint32_t *result) {
> + return nouveau_call_dsm(handle, nouveau_dsm_muid,
> + NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_NVIDIA, func, arg, result);
> }
>
> /* Returns 1 if a DSM function is usable and 0 otherwise */
> --
> 1.8.3.4
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau/acpi: de-dup use of DSM methods
2013-08-02 5:58 ` Dave Airlie
@ 2013-08-02 7:41 ` Peter Wu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Peter Wu @ 2013-08-02 7:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Airlie; +Cc: dri-devel
On Friday 02 August 2013 15:58:38 Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Peter Wu <lekensteyn@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Observe that nouveau_optimus_dsm and nouveau_dsm are equal except for
> > the parameters handling (UUID, revision ID and function arguments). The
> > function arguments are passed as Buffer in the "optimus dsm" and Integer
> > in "nvidia dsm". As buffers are implicitly converted to integers, merge
> > both functions.
> >
> > The ACPI spec defines the fourth parameter (Arg3 a.k.a. "function
> > arguments") as Package, but many BIOSes expect a Buffer instead. For
> > instance, for the "nvidia DSM", the Lenovo T410s uses CreateByteField on
> > Arg3 which does not work with a package. The Clevo B7130 does something
> > similar for the "Optimus DSM". Unfortunately, this means that the
> > following ACPI warning (introduced with 29a241c) cannot be fixed (when
>
> > toggling power or muxing):
> By cannot be fixed, why is it there then? maybe ask the ACPI folks to
> drop this error, since as far as I can see all optimus dsm want a
> buffer here.
It helps tracking violations of the ACPI spec which can be used as debugging
tool, as a result there is also a patch for i915 (which was based on this
nouveau code). Of course, if real world only uses Buffers, then this warning
should be dropped/changed, but there are more users of _DSM besides the
graphics subsystem.
Regards,
Peter
> > ACPI Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found
> > [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95) ACPI
> > Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found
> > [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95) ACPI
> > Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.P0P2.PEGP._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found
> > [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95) ACPI
> > Warning: \_SB_.PCI0.P0P2.PEGP._DSM: Argument #4 type mismatch - Found
> > [Buffer], ACPI requires [Package] (20130517/nsarguments-95)>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Wu <lekensteyn@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >
> > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c | 67
> > ++++++++++------------------------ 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 47
> > deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c index d97f200..a75684f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> > @@ -46,6 +46,9 @@ bool nouveau_is_v1_dsm(void) {
> >
> > #define NOUVEAU_DSM_HAS_MUX 0x1
> > #define NOUVEAU_DSM_HAS_OPT 0x2
> >
> > +#define NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_NVIDIA 0x102
> > +#define NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_OPTIMUS 0x100
> > +
> >
> > static const char nouveau_dsm_muid[] = {
> >
> > 0xA0, 0xA0, 0x95, 0x9D, 0x60, 0x00, 0x48, 0x4D,
> > 0xB3, 0x4D, 0x7E, 0x5F, 0xEA, 0x12, 0x9F, 0xD4,
> >
> > @@ -56,7 +59,8 @@ static const char nouveau_op_dsm_muid[] = {
> >
> > 0xA7, 0x2B, 0x60, 0x42, 0xA6, 0xB5, 0xBE, 0xE0,
> >
> > };
> >
> > -static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg,
> > uint32_t *result) +static int nouveau_call_dsm(acpi_handle handle, const
> > char *uuid, int revid, + int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
> >
> > {
> >
> > struct acpi_buffer output = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> > struct acpi_object_list input;
> >
> > @@ -68,12 +72,15 @@ static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int
> > func, int arg, uint32_t *>
> > input.count = 4;
> > input.pointer = params;
> > params[0].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
> >
> > - params[0].buffer.length = sizeof(nouveau_op_dsm_muid);
> > - params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)nouveau_op_dsm_muid;
> > + params[0].buffer.length = 16;
> > + params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)uuid;
> >
> > params[1].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> >
> > - params[1].integer.value = 0x00000100;
> > + params[1].integer.value = revid;
> >
> > params[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> > params[2].integer.value = func;
> >
> > + /* Although the ACPI spec defines Arg3 as a Package, in practise
> > + * implementations expect a Buffer (CreateWordField and Index
> > functions + * are applied to it). */
> >
> > params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
> > params[3].buffer.length = 4;
> > /* ACPI is little endian, AABBCCDD becomes {DD,CC,BB,AA} */
> >
> > @@ -108,50 +115,16 @@ static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle,
> > int func, int arg, uint32_t *>
> > return 0;
> >
> > }
> >
> > -static int nouveau_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t
> > *result) -{
> > - struct acpi_buffer output = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> > - struct acpi_object_list input;
> > - union acpi_object params[4];
> > - union acpi_object *obj;
> > - int err;
> > -
> > - input.count = 4;
> > - input.pointer = params;
> > - params[0].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER;
> > - params[0].buffer.length = sizeof(nouveau_dsm_muid);
> > - params[0].buffer.pointer = (char *)nouveau_dsm_muid;
> > - params[1].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> > - params[1].integer.value = 0x00000102;
> > - params[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> > - params[2].integer.value = func;
> > - params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> > - params[3].integer.value = arg;
> > -
> > - err = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
> > - if (err) {
> > - printk(KERN_INFO "failed to evaluate _DSM: %d\n", err);
> > - return err;
> > - }
> > -
> > - obj = (union acpi_object *)output.pointer;
> > -
> > - if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER)
> > - if (obj->integer.value == 0x80000002)
> > - return -ENODEV;
> > -
> > - if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER) {
> > - if (obj->buffer.length == 4 && result) {
> > - *result = 0;
> > - *result |= obj->buffer.pointer[0];
> > - *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[1] << 8);
> > - *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[2] << 16);
> > - *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[3] << 24);
> > - }
> > - }
> > +static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func,
> > + int arg, uint32_t *result) {
> > + return nouveau_call_dsm(handle, nouveau_op_dsm_muid,
> > + NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_OPTIMUS, func, arg, result);
> > +}
> >
> > - kfree(output.pointer);
> > - return 0;
> > +static int nouveau_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func,
> > + int arg, uint32_t *result) {
> > + return nouveau_call_dsm(handle, nouveau_dsm_muid,
> > + NOUVEAU_DSM_REVID_NVIDIA, func, arg, result);
> >
> > }
> >
> > /* Returns 1 if a DSM function is usable and 0 otherwise */
> >
> > --
> > 1.8.3.4
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dri-devel mailing list
> > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-08-02 7:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-08-01 14:41 [PATCH] drm/nouveau/acpi: de-dup use of DSM methods Peter Wu
2013-08-02 5:58 ` Dave Airlie
2013-08-02 7:41 ` Peter Wu
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.