On 05/09/2023 08:04, Christian König wrote:
Testing for reset is pointless since the reset can start right after the
test. Grab the reset semaphore instead.
The same PASID can be used by more than once VMID, build a mask of VMIDs
to reset instead of just restting the first one.
Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v7_0.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v7_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v7_0.c
index 6a6929ac2748..9e19a752f94b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v7_0.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v7_0.c
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
#include "amdgpu_ucode.h"
#include "amdgpu_amdkfd.h"
#include "amdgpu_gem.h"
+#include "amdgpu_reset.h"
#include "bif/bif_4_1_d.h"
#include "bif/bif_4_1_sh_mask.h"
@@ -426,23 +427,23 @@ static int gmc_v7_0_flush_gpu_tlb_pasid(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
uint16_t pasid, uint32_t flush_type,
bool all_hub, uint32_t inst)
{
+ u32 mask = 0x0;
int vmid;
- unsigned int tmp;
- if (amdgpu_in_reset(adev))
- return -EIO;
+ if(!down_read_trylock(&adev->reset_domain->sem))
+ return 0;
for (vmid = 1; vmid < 16; vmid++) {
+ u32 tmp = RREG32(mmATC_VMID0_PASID_MAPPING + vmid);
- tmp = RREG32(mmATC_VMID0_PASID_MAPPING + vmid);
if ((tmp & ATC_VMID0_PASID_MAPPING__VALID_MASK) &&
- (tmp & ATC_VMID0_PASID_MAPPING__PASID_MASK) == pasid) {
- WREG32(mmVM_INVALIDATE_REQUEST, 1 << vmid);
- RREG32(mmVM_INVALIDATE_RESPONSE);
- break;
- }
+ (tmp & ATC_VMID0_PASID_MAPPING__PASID_MASK) == pasid)
+ mask |= 1 << vmid;
I am a bit concerned here about the change in code, in the previous code
we were writing the 'first match out of 16' of tmp and of mask and
programming the registers with (1 << vmid), whereas in new code set we
are writing the 'last match out of 16' of vmid. Is that intentional or
expected ?
- Shashank
}
+ WREG32(mmVM_INVALIDATE_REQUEST, mask);
+ RREG32(mmVM_INVALIDATE_RESPONSE);
+ up_read(&adev->reset_domain->sem);
return 0;
}
