llvm.lists.linux.dev archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 5/8] drm/i915: modify max_bw to return index to intel_bw_info
       [not found] <20230425202826.1144429-6-vinod.govindapillai@intel.com>
@ 2023-04-25 23:17 ` kernel test robot
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2023-04-25 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Vinod Govindapillai, intel-gfx; +Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, ville.syrjala

Hi Vinod,

kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:

[auto build test WARNING on drm-tip/drm-tip]

url:    https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Vinod-Govindapillai/drm-i915-fix-the-derating-percentage-for-MTL/20230426-043120
base:   git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-tip drm-tip
patch link:    https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230425202826.1144429-6-vinod.govindapillai%40intel.com
patch subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 5/8] drm/i915: modify max_bw to return index to intel_bw_info
config: x86_64-randconfig-a005 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230426/202304260700.y79nyqxs-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 14.0.6 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project f28c006a5895fc0e329fe15fead81e37457cb1d1)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
        wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
        chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
        # https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commit/aad4c33c841b54fa494a8e76da11b72f20bee83b
        git remote add linux-review https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux
        git fetch --no-tags linux-review Vinod-Govindapillai/drm-i915-fix-the-derating-percentage-for-MTL/20230426-043120
        git checkout aad4c33c841b54fa494a8e76da11b72f20bee83b
        # save the config file
        mkdir build_dir && cp config build_dir/.config
        COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=x86_64 olddefconfig
        COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=x86_64 SHELL=/bin/bash drivers/gpu/drm/i915/

If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag where applicable
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Link: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202304260700.y79nyqxs-lkp@intel.com/

All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):

>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c:833:7: warning: variable 'idx' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
                   if (idx > ARRAY_SIZE(i915->display.bw.max))
                       ^~~
   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c:825:19: note: initialize the variable 'idx' to silence this warning
                   unsigned int idx;
                                   ^
                                    = 0
   1 warning generated.


vim +/idx +833 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c

   804	
   805	static int icl_find_qgv_points(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
   806				       unsigned int data_rate,
   807				       unsigned int num_active_planes,
   808				       const struct intel_bw_state *old_bw_state,
   809				       struct intel_bw_state *new_bw_state)
   810	{
   811		unsigned int max_bw_point = 0;
   812		unsigned int max_bw = 0;
   813		unsigned int num_psf_gv_points = i915->display.bw.max[0].num_psf_gv_points;
   814		unsigned int num_qgv_points = i915->display.bw.max[0].num_qgv_points;
   815		u16 psf_points = 0;
   816		u16 qgv_points = 0;
   817		int i;
   818		int ret;
   819	
   820		ret = intel_atomic_lock_global_state(&new_bw_state->base);
   821		if (ret)
   822			return ret;
   823	
   824		for (i = 0; i < num_qgv_points; i++) {
   825			unsigned int idx;
   826			unsigned int max_data_rate;
   827	
   828			if (DISPLAY_VER(i915) > 11)
   829				tgl_max_bw_index(i915, num_active_planes, i);
   830			else
   831				icl_max_bw_index(i915, num_active_planes, i);
   832	
 > 833			if (idx > ARRAY_SIZE(i915->display.bw.max))
   834				continue;
   835	
   836			max_data_rate = i915->display.bw.max[idx].deratedbw[i];
   837	
   838			/*
   839			 * We need to know which qgv point gives us
   840			 * maximum bandwidth in order to disable SAGV
   841			 * if we find that we exceed SAGV block time
   842			 * with watermarks. By that moment we already
   843			 * have those, as it is calculated earlier in
   844			 * intel_atomic_check,
   845			 */
   846			if (max_data_rate > max_bw) {
   847				max_bw_point = i;
   848				max_bw = max_data_rate;
   849			}
   850			if (max_data_rate >= data_rate)
   851				qgv_points |= BIT(i);
   852	
   853			drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "QGV point %d: max bw %d required %d\n",
   854				    i, max_data_rate, data_rate);
   855		}
   856	
   857		for (i = 0; i < num_psf_gv_points; i++) {
   858			unsigned int max_data_rate = adl_psf_bw(i915, i);
   859	
   860			if (max_data_rate >= data_rate)
   861				psf_points |= BIT(i);
   862	
   863			drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "PSF GV point %d: max bw %d"
   864				    " required %d\n",
   865				    i, max_data_rate, data_rate);
   866		}
   867	
   868		/*
   869		 * BSpec states that we always should have at least one allowed point
   870		 * left, so if we couldn't - simply reject the configuration for obvious
   871		 * reasons.
   872		 */
   873		if (qgv_points == 0) {
   874			drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "No QGV points provide sufficient memory"
   875				    " bandwidth %d for display configuration(%d active planes).\n",
   876				    data_rate, num_active_planes);
   877			return -EINVAL;
   878		}
   879	
   880		if (num_psf_gv_points > 0 && psf_points == 0) {
   881			drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "No PSF GV points provide sufficient memory"
   882				    " bandwidth %d for display configuration(%d active planes).\n",
   883				    data_rate, num_active_planes);
   884			return -EINVAL;
   885		}
   886	
   887		/*
   888		 * Leave only single point with highest bandwidth, if
   889		 * we can't enable SAGV due to the increased memory latency it may
   890		 * cause.
   891		 */
   892		if (!intel_can_enable_sagv(i915, new_bw_state)) {
   893			qgv_points = BIT(max_bw_point);
   894			drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "No SAGV, using single QGV point %d\n",
   895				    max_bw_point);
   896		}
   897	
   898		/*
   899		 * We store the ones which need to be masked as that is what PCode
   900		 * actually accepts as a parameter.
   901		 */
   902		new_bw_state->qgv_points_mask =
   903			~(ICL_PCODE_REQ_QGV_PT(qgv_points) |
   904			  ADLS_PCODE_REQ_PSF_PT(psf_points)) &
   905			icl_qgv_points_mask(i915);
   906	
   907		/*
   908		 * If the actual mask had changed we need to make sure that
   909		 * the commits are serialized(in case this is a nomodeset, nonblocking)
   910		 */
   911		if (new_bw_state->qgv_points_mask != old_bw_state->qgv_points_mask) {
   912			ret = intel_atomic_serialize_global_state(&new_bw_state->base);
   913			if (ret)
   914				return ret;
   915		}
   916	
   917		return 0;
   918	}
   919	

-- 
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2023-04-25 23:18 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <20230425202826.1144429-6-vinod.govindapillai@intel.com>
2023-04-25 23:17 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 5/8] drm/i915: modify max_bw to return index to intel_bw_info kernel test robot

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).