On Mon, 2023-06-26 at 10:38 -0500, Adam Ford wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 8:22 AM Frank Binns <Frank.Binns@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > > > On Sat, 2023-06-17 at 07:48 -0500, Adam Ford wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 10:20 AM Sarah Walker <sarah.walker@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Read the GPU ID register at probe time and select the correct > > > > features/quirks/enhancements. Use the GPU ID to form the firmware > > > > file name and load the firmware. > > > > > > I have a Rogue 6250 variant, but the BVNC is returning a slightly > > > different revision than the firmware that's currently available, and > > > the older firmware for the vendor driver doesn't work with this new > > > code. > > > > > > Linux responds with Unsupported BVNC: 4.45.2.58. From what I can > > > tell, the closest available firmware is 4.40.2.51. > > > > > > Will there be more firmware variants in the future or will there be > > > some options to build the firmware somehow? > > > > We don't plan to support the SoC vendor provided firmware binaries as this will > > mean having to deal with many different versions of the firmware and its > > interface. Specifically, the interface can change in backwards incompatible ways > > between releases, it changes based on the hardware feature set & bugs and it's > > split across userspace & the kernel. This makes these SoC provided firmware > > binaries very difficult to support in this new driver. > > Thanks for the response. > > That makes sense. I would hope that various SoC vendors would jump on > the bandwagon to work with your group to get their hardware supported. > > As an alternative, we'll be releasing firmware binaries as we add support for > > more Rogue GPUs. We'll also release binaries upon request, in case others in the > > community want to work on support in the meantime - we're just getting things > > set up for this at the moment. > > The Mesa side of things appears to be missing some documentation, and > the power VR stuff still appears listed as experimental. Is there > some documentation somewhere that would explain to someone how to go > about porting the Rogue 6250 to a different hardware variant of the > 6250? I don't really know the difference between BVNC of 4.45.2.58 > and 4.40.2.51, but I can't imagine they are drastically different. One thing I forgot to mention is that, alongside the firmware binaries, we'll also provide the corresponding device info, e.g. for Mesa: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/blob/e714b35301a33145399f8939ca864ffd14b49de9/src/imagination/common/pvr_device_info.c#L32-125 We don't have any specific porting documentation, but we did just send out a Mesa MR adding some initial (basic) documentation: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/merge_requests/23992 In terms of differences between the two GX6250 variants, it doesn't seem that there's anything feature-wise that will require any driver changes that are specific to the 4.45.2.58 variant (the different firmware should in theory be sufficient). There are still some driver changes required, however. Assuming the SoC you're interested in is already well supported upstream and the clocks, power controllers, etc needed by the GPU are also already supported then the following changes will be required at a minimum: 1. A GPU node will need adding to the device tree source file for your specific board 2. The compatible string for the GPU node will need adding to the list of supported devices in the kernel driver (grep for "dt_match" in the driver code) 3. The device info we provide alongside the firmware binary will need adding to the kernel driver and Mesa 4. The compatible string for the GPU and display controller device tree nodes will need adding to the Vulkan driver (grep for "pvr_drm_configs" in the Mesa code to see existing examples) Hopefully that covers everything, but no doubt I missed something! With respect to the experimental status of the driver, I think there are three things that need to happen before we can drop this tag. Firstly, the kernel driver needs to be merged to the kernel. Secondly, we need to pass Khronos conformance on at least one of the devices we support (our current focus is on the AXE-1-16M). Finally, we need to upstream all our Mesa changes. This is something that we've been chipping away at, but we do have a big backlog in our public branch [1]. I expect it's going to be quite some time until all of this work is complete. While so much code is sitting in downstream branches I think it's going to be somewhat painful for people to meaningfully contribute to the driver itself. Effort is probably best spent on getting the other drivers, which the GPU driver depends on, upstream for the platform(s) you're interested in. Just to say that I'm by no means trying to put you off from contributing, but simply trying to warn you that until the driver is out of its experimental state, a lot of things are going to be in flux and the development process is currently a lot more complicated. It's also worth highlighting that we're a small team tackling a very large job! We're doing our best to do things in the proper way and to lay good foundations for the future. We're also learning along the way, so please bear with us :-) Thanks Frank [1] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/frankbinns/mesa/-/commits/powervr-mesa-next/
