Re: [PATCH 14/15] drm/radeon: record what is next valid wptr for each ring v3

[Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Christian König
<deathsimple@vodafone.de> wrote:
> On 12.07.2012 18:36, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Christian König
>> <deathsimple@vodafone.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> Before emitting any indirect buffer, emit the offset of the next
>>> valid ring content if any. This allow code that want to resume
>>> ring to resume ring right after ib that caused GPU lockup.
>>>
>>> v2: use scratch registers instead of storing it into memory
>>> v3: skip over the surface sync for ni and si as well
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <deathsimple@vodafone.de>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c   |    8 +++++++-
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/ni.c          |   11 ++++++++++-
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/r600.c        |   18 ++++++++++++++++--
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h      |    1 +
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ring.c |    4 ++++
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/rv770.c       |    4 +++-
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/si.c          |   22 +++++++++++++++++++---
>>>   7 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c
>>> index f39b900..40de347 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c
>>> @@ -1368,7 +1368,13 @@ void evergreen_ring_ib_execute(struct
>>> radeon_device *rdev, struct radeon_ib *ib)
>>>          /* set to DX10/11 mode */
>>>          radeon_ring_write(ring, PACKET3(PACKET3_MODE_CONTROL, 0));
>>>          radeon_ring_write(ring, 1);
>>> -       /* FIXME: implement */
>>> +
>>> +       if (ring->rptr_save_reg) {
>>> +               uint32_t next_rptr = ring->wptr + 2 + 4;
>>> +               radeon_ring_write(ring, PACKET0(ring->rptr_save_reg, 0));
>>> +               radeon_ring_write(ring, next_rptr);
>>> +       }
>>
>> On r600 and newer please use SET_CONFIG_REG rather than Packet0.
>
> Why? Please note that it's on purpose that this doesn't interfere with the
> top/bottom of pipe handling and the draw commands, e.g. the register write
> isn't associated with drawing but instead just marks the beginning of
> parsing the IB.

Packet0's are have been semi-deprecated since r600.  They still work,
but the CP guys recommend using the appropriate packet3 whenever
possible.

Alex