From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HK_RANDOM_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41364C433E0 for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:24:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C964364DA1 for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:24:52 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C964364DA1 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F84D6E063; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:24:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 399DF6E063 for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:24:51 +0000 (UTC) IronPort-SDR: ZZn2dROS2ltyA2K8N8E0Hxl4UcUqFd+mPmsKhV17HjRKuSfO+0oVCW7IwdWFRX9pBLDjXDXFQy DUuLWI+5lybw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9897"; a="162291955" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,184,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="162291955" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Feb 2021 02:24:49 -0800 IronPort-SDR: aNbyo0nPcjIL0X2NodtcN/Q5Q/SxyzTAhirY6ziNADYTF/1A59PxkFS1hitlcApwhJzIadSgBm B4TWhvDCRvPg== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,184,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="399903650" Received: from jmyrcha-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.252.41.48]) ([10.252.41.48]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Feb 2021 02:24:48 -0800 To: "Chiou, Cooper" , "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" References: <20200916180745.627-1-cooper.chiou@intel.com> <161285475934.28238.17153316113364596984@emeril.freedesktop.org> From: Tvrtko Ursulin Organization: Intel Corporation UK Plc Message-ID: Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:24:46 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] =?utf-8?b?4pyXIEZpLkNJLkJBVDogZmFpbHVyZSBmb3IgZHJt?= =?utf-8?q?/i915=3A_Enable_WaProgramMgsrForCorrectSliceSpecificMmioReads_f?= =?utf-8?q?or_Gen9_=28rev2=29?= X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" Hi, On 09/02/2021 11:37, Chiou, Cooper wrote: > From this CI warning log, there are all known warning message in i915 > driver and is not caused by my patch. > > Warning 1: > > <3> [69.081809] [drm:wa_verify [i915]] *ERROR* engine workaround lost on > application! (reg[b004]=0x0, relevant bits were 0x0 vs expected 0x80) > > Warning 2: > > <3> [619.188270] i915/intel_lrc_live_selftests: live_lrc_isolation > failed with error -22 > > Warning 3: > > <3> [282.248111] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* CPU pipe A FIFO underrun This one: igt@i915_pm_rpm@module-reload: fi-cfl-8109u: PASS -> DMESG-WARN +35 similar issues <3> [198.221812] [drm:wa_verify [i915]] *ERROR* engine workaround lost on application! (reg[b004]=0x0, relevant bits were 0x0 vs expected 0x80) <3> [198.222751] [drm:wa_verify [i915]] *ERROR* engine workaround lost on application! (reg[b118]=0x0, relevant bits were 0x0 vs expected 0x200000) <3> [198.223076] [drm:wa_verify [i915]] *ERROR* engine workaround lost on application! (reg[b11c]=0x0, relevant bits were 0x0 vs expected 0x4) ? CI does not think they are old warnings and registers are the MCR affected range. So more digging would be needed to be sure. You are saying those happen in our CI without the patch? Then with regards to the reported perf drop - something to check would be if the CML system you tested on has the same slice/subslice config as the one from which the original report originated. Might be hard if the test farm has been re-configured. But essentially running the benchmark on a few Gen9 machine with fused ss would be needed I think. And finally I couldn't find the WA entry in bspec, but maybe I just don't know where to look. Someone better versed to finding WA. Maybe Matt you would have time for a quick check if WaProgramMgsrForCorrectSliceSpecificMmioReads is documented as applicable to Gen9? Regards, Tvrtko _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx