On 2017-07-13 02:36 PM, Andres Rodriguez wrote: > On 2017-07-12 02:26 PM, Jay Cornwall wrote: >> The number of compute queues available to the KFD was erroneously >> calculated as 64. Only the first MEC can execute compute queues and >> it has 32 queue slots. >> >> This caused the oversubscription limit to be calculated incorrectly, >> leading to a missing chained runlist command at the end of an >> oversubscribed runlist. >> >> Change-Id: Ic4a139c04b8a6d025fbb831a0a67e98728bfe461 >> Signed-off-by: Jay Cornwall <Jay.Cornwall at amd.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.c >> index 7060daf..aa4006a 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.c >> @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ void amdgpu_amdkfd_device_init(struct >> amdgpu_device *adev) >> /* According to linux/bitmap.h we shouldn't use bitmap_clear if >> * nbits is not compile time constant >> */ >> - last_valid_bit = adev->gfx.mec.num_mec >> + last_valid_bit = 1 /* only first MEC can have compute queues */ > > Hey Jay, > > Minor nitpick. We already have some similar resource patching in > kgd2kfd_device_init(), and I think it would be good to keep all of these > together. > > Otherwise, looks good to me. Just re-read my reply and wanted to clarify. I don't really have a strong opining on which side does the resource availability patched. Whether it happens here or on the KFD side it is fine. I just don't think it is good to keep it in different two places. Regards, Andres > > Regards, > Andres > >> * adev->gfx.mec.num_pipe_per_mec >> * adev->gfx.mec.num_queue_per_pipe; >> for (i = last_valid_bit; i < KGD_MAX_QUEUES; ++i) >>
