All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele" <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
To: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>,
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Anshuman <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Rodrigo <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/gsc: Fix the Driver-FLR completion
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 15:35:41 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d3f8a48e-86fe-4dea-a280-91f016707e92@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230223220458.520815-1-alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>



On 2/23/2023 2:04 PM, Alan Previn wrote:
> The Driver-FLR flow may inadvertently exit early before the full
> completion of the re-init of the internal HW state if we only poll
> GU_DEBUG Bit31 (polling for it to toggle from 0 -> 1). Instead
> we need a two-step completion wait-for-completion flow that also
> involves GU_CNTL. See the patch and new code comments for detail.
> This is new direction from HW architecture folks.
>
>     v2: - Add error message for the teardown timeout (Anshuman)
>         - Don't duplicate code in comments (Jani)
>     v3: - Add get/put runtime-pm for this function. Though
>           not functionally required during unload, its so the uncore
> 	 doesn't complain.

I think my comment applied to an older version of this code. The FLR is 
done after we've already disabled rpm (from driver_unregister), so we 
shouldn't need to take a ref here. If this ever changes, then the rpm 
get/put should be added to the caller (uncore_fini_mmio) because there 
are other register accesses performed by that function and we should 
cover them all.
Given this, IMO we should revert back to the v2 version of this patch, 
so I'm going to review that one.

Daniele

>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>
> Fixes: 5a44fcd73498 ("drm/i915/gsc: Do a driver-FLR on unload if GSC was loaded")
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++---
>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> index f018da7ebaac..9832b8ac8b1a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> @@ -2724,10 +2724,13 @@ static void driver_initiated_flr(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
>   {
>   	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = uncore->i915;
>   	const unsigned int flr_timeout_ms = 3000; /* specs recommend a 3s wait */
> +	intel_wakeref_t wakeref;
>   	int ret;
>   
>   	drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "Triggering Driver-FLR\n");
>   
> +	wakeref = intel_runtime_pm_get(&i915->runtime_pm);
> +
>   	/*
>   	 * Make sure any pending FLR requests have cleared by waiting for the
>   	 * FLR trigger bit to go to zero. Also clear GU_DEBUG's DRIVERFLR_STATUS
> @@ -2742,22 +2745,36 @@ static void driver_initiated_flr(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
>   		drm_err(&i915->drm,
>   			"Failed to wait for Driver-FLR bit to clear! %d\n",
>   			ret);
> -		return;
> +		goto out;
>   	}
>   	intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, GU_DEBUG, DRIVERFLR_STATUS);
>   
>   	/* Trigger the actual Driver-FLR */
>   	intel_uncore_rmw_fw(uncore, GU_CNTL, 0, DRIVERFLR);
>   
> +	/* Wait for hardware teardown to complete */
> +	ret = intel_wait_for_register_fw(uncore, GU_CNTL,
> +					 DRIVERFLR_STATUS, 0,
> +					 flr_timeout_ms);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		drm_err(&i915->drm, "Driver-FLR-teardown wait completion failed! %d\n", ret);
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Wait for hardware/firmware re-init to complete */
>   	ret = intel_wait_for_register_fw(uncore, GU_DEBUG,
>   					 DRIVERFLR_STATUS, DRIVERFLR_STATUS,
>   					 flr_timeout_ms);
>   	if (ret) {
> -		drm_err(&i915->drm, "wait for Driver-FLR completion failed! %d\n", ret);
> -		return;
> +		drm_err(&i915->drm, "Driver-FLR-reinit wait completion failed! %d\n", ret);
> +		goto out;
>   	}
>   
> +	/* Clear sticky completion status */
>   	intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, GU_DEBUG, DRIVERFLR_STATUS);
> +
> +out:
> +	intel_runtime_pm_put(&i915->runtime_pm, wakeref);
>   }
>   
>   /* Called via drm-managed action */


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele" <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
To: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>,
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Rodrigo <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/gsc: Fix the Driver-FLR completion
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 15:35:41 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d3f8a48e-86fe-4dea-a280-91f016707e92@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230223220458.520815-1-alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>



On 2/23/2023 2:04 PM, Alan Previn wrote:
> The Driver-FLR flow may inadvertently exit early before the full
> completion of the re-init of the internal HW state if we only poll
> GU_DEBUG Bit31 (polling for it to toggle from 0 -> 1). Instead
> we need a two-step completion wait-for-completion flow that also
> involves GU_CNTL. See the patch and new code comments for detail.
> This is new direction from HW architecture folks.
>
>     v2: - Add error message for the teardown timeout (Anshuman)
>         - Don't duplicate code in comments (Jani)
>     v3: - Add get/put runtime-pm for this function. Though
>           not functionally required during unload, its so the uncore
> 	 doesn't complain.

I think my comment applied to an older version of this code. The FLR is 
done after we've already disabled rpm (from driver_unregister), so we 
shouldn't need to take a ref here. If this ever changes, then the rpm 
get/put should be added to the caller (uncore_fini_mmio) because there 
are other register accesses performed by that function and we should 
cover them all.
Given this, IMO we should revert back to the v2 version of this patch, 
so I'm going to review that one.

Daniele

>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>
> Fixes: 5a44fcd73498 ("drm/i915/gsc: Do a driver-FLR on unload if GSC was loaded")
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++---
>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> index f018da7ebaac..9832b8ac8b1a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> @@ -2724,10 +2724,13 @@ static void driver_initiated_flr(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
>   {
>   	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = uncore->i915;
>   	const unsigned int flr_timeout_ms = 3000; /* specs recommend a 3s wait */
> +	intel_wakeref_t wakeref;
>   	int ret;
>   
>   	drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "Triggering Driver-FLR\n");
>   
> +	wakeref = intel_runtime_pm_get(&i915->runtime_pm);
> +
>   	/*
>   	 * Make sure any pending FLR requests have cleared by waiting for the
>   	 * FLR trigger bit to go to zero. Also clear GU_DEBUG's DRIVERFLR_STATUS
> @@ -2742,22 +2745,36 @@ static void driver_initiated_flr(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
>   		drm_err(&i915->drm,
>   			"Failed to wait for Driver-FLR bit to clear! %d\n",
>   			ret);
> -		return;
> +		goto out;
>   	}
>   	intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, GU_DEBUG, DRIVERFLR_STATUS);
>   
>   	/* Trigger the actual Driver-FLR */
>   	intel_uncore_rmw_fw(uncore, GU_CNTL, 0, DRIVERFLR);
>   
> +	/* Wait for hardware teardown to complete */
> +	ret = intel_wait_for_register_fw(uncore, GU_CNTL,
> +					 DRIVERFLR_STATUS, 0,
> +					 flr_timeout_ms);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		drm_err(&i915->drm, "Driver-FLR-teardown wait completion failed! %d\n", ret);
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Wait for hardware/firmware re-init to complete */
>   	ret = intel_wait_for_register_fw(uncore, GU_DEBUG,
>   					 DRIVERFLR_STATUS, DRIVERFLR_STATUS,
>   					 flr_timeout_ms);
>   	if (ret) {
> -		drm_err(&i915->drm, "wait for Driver-FLR completion failed! %d\n", ret);
> -		return;
> +		drm_err(&i915->drm, "Driver-FLR-reinit wait completion failed! %d\n", ret);
> +		goto out;
>   	}
>   
> +	/* Clear sticky completion status */
>   	intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, GU_DEBUG, DRIVERFLR_STATUS);
> +
> +out:
> +	intel_runtime_pm_put(&i915->runtime_pm, wakeref);
>   }
>   
>   /* Called via drm-managed action */


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-02-23 23:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-23 22:04 [PATCH] drm/i915/gsc: Fix the Driver-FLR completion Alan Previn
2023-02-23 22:04 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alan Previn
2023-02-23 22:40 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915/gsc: Fix the Driver-FLR completion (rev2) Patchwork
2023-02-23 23:35 ` Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele [this message]
2023-02-23 23:35   ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/gsc: Fix the Driver-FLR completion Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-02-24  0:17 Alan Previn
2023-02-22 21:01 Alan Previn
2023-02-23 21:48 ` Teres Alexis, Alan Previn
2023-02-23 23:49 ` Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
2023-02-24  0:05   ` Teres Alexis, Alan Previn

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=d3f8a48e-86fe-4dea-a280-91f016707e92@intel.com \
    --to=daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com \
    --cc=alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com \
    --cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    /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 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.