On 11/23/2016 11:46 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 11/22/2016 07:47 AM, Jordan Crouse wrote: >>> Add some new functions to manipulate GPU registers. gpu_read64 and >>> gpu_write64 can read/write a 64 bit value to two 32 bit registers. >>> For 4XX and older these are normally perfcounter registers, but >>> future targets will use 64 bit addressing so there will be many >>> more spots where a 64 bit read and write are needed. >>> >>> gpu_rmw() does a read/modify/write on a 32 bit register given a mask >>> and bits to OR in. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a4xx_gpu.c | 12 ++--------- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gpu.h | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a4xx_gpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a4xx_gpu.c >>> index ba16507..b82210c 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a4xx_gpu.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a4xx_gpu.c >>> @@ -513,16 +513,8 @@ static int a4xx_pm_suspend(struct msm_gpu *gpu) { >>> >>> static int a4xx_get_timestamp(struct msm_gpu *gpu, uint64_t *value) >>> { >>> - uint32_t hi, lo, tmp; >>> - >>> - tmp = gpu_read(gpu, REG_A4XX_RBBM_PERFCTR_CP_0_HI); >>> - do { >>> - hi = tmp; >>> - lo = gpu_read(gpu, REG_A4XX_RBBM_PERFCTR_CP_0_LO); >>> - tmp = gpu_read(gpu, REG_A4XX_RBBM_PERFCTR_CP_0_HI); >>> - } while (tmp != hi); >>> - >>> - *value = (((uint64_t)hi) << 32) | lo; >>> + *value = gpu_read64(gpu, REG_A4XX_RBBM_PERFCTR_CP_0_LO, >>> + REG_A4XX_RBBM_PERFCTR_CP_0_HI); >> Did we stop caring about the case where the high bits changed while the >> low bits were read? gpu_read64 (pretty poor name by the way considering >> how many GPUs there are supported in the kernel) doesn't look to check >> for or handle that case. > fancy hw is fancy ;-) > > seems like for the perf ctrs reading _LO latches _HI so the loop was > overkill (and only worked in the first place because I happened to > read _LO first) > > I was planning to smash in a comment to that effect when I merged this patch > > Ah ok. There's already a comment in the newly introduced function to that effect but no mention in the commit text hence the confusion. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel