On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Lucas Stach <dev@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Mittwoch, den 28.08.2013, 17:09 +1000 schrieb Ben Skeggs:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Lucas Stach <dev@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>> > MSIs were only problematic on some old, broken chipsets. But now that we
>>>>>>>> > already see systems where PCI legacy interrupts are somewhat flaky, it's
>>>>>>>> > really time to move to MSIs.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Signed-off-by: Lucas Stach <dev@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>> > ---
>>>>>>>> > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/include/subdev/mc.h | 1 +
>>>>>>>> > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>> > 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/include/subdev/mc.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/include/subdev/mc.h
>>>>>>>> > index 9d2cd20..ce6569f 100644
>>>>>>>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/include/subdev/mc.h
>>>>>>>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/include/subdev/mc.h
>>>>>>>> > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ struct nouveau_mc_intr {
>>>>>>>> > struct nouveau_mc {
>>>>>>>> > struct nouveau_subdev base;
>>>>>>>> > const struct nouveau_mc_intr *intr_map;
>>>>>>>> > + bool use_msi;
>>>>>>>> > };
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > static inline struct nouveau_mc *
>>>>>>>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c
>>>>>>>> > index ec9cd6f..02b337e 100644
>>>>>>>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c
>>>>>>>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c
>>>>>>>> > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>>>>>>>> > */
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > #include <subdev/mc.h>
>>>>>>>> > +#include <core/option.h>
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > static irqreturn_t
>>>>>>>> > nouveau_mc_intr(int irq, void *arg)
>>>>>>>> > @@ -43,6 +44,9 @@ nouveau_mc_intr(int irq, void *arg)
>>>>>>>> > map++;
>>>>>>>> > }
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > + if (pmc->use_msi)
>>>>>>>> > + nv_wr08(pmc->base.base.parent, 0x00088068, 0xff);
>>>>>>>> Register not present everywhere.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the very least, the enabling of MSI should be disallowed on the
>>>>>>>> earlier chipsets where it's not supported. Though, it's perhaps
>>>>>>>> possible that the pci_enable_msi() call will fail in all of these
>>>>>>>> cases anyway.. I'm not certain.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MSIs are required property for everything doing PCIe. So the only cases
>>>>>>> where this should fail is plain PCI/AGP devices. I don't really have a
>>>>>>> test system for those old cards set up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But I remember Ilia having some legacy things plugged in, so maybe he
>>>>>>> could test this patch and see how it goes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure, let me know what you need -- I have nv18 PCI, nv34 PCIe (note
>>>>>> that it's not native PCIe, but some sort of bridge thing IIRC),
>>>>> Cases like the nv34 here (i think there's some nv4x that aren't native
>>>>> pcie too) are what I'm wondering about primarily.
>>>>
>>>> And rightly so. With the NV18 PCI, NV34 PCIe, NV42 PCIe plugged in,
>>>> with "AutoAddGPU" disabled the NV18 and NV42 seem fine. However merely
>>>> starting X (not xinit, not startx, not [gkx]dm) on the NV34 and ^C'ing
>>>> it (with no clients connecting to said X), causes a "failed to idle
>>>> channel" message in dmesg, which apparently never rectifies itself, so
>>>> X is hung forever. FTR, there were no displays connected either, but I
>>>> tried the exact same procedure without the MSI patch and it worked
>>>> fine. Here is the init sequence with the MSI patch:
>>> I don't suppose bashing 0x1868 instead of 0x88068 works here? If not,
>>
>> Should that work on the NV42 as well?
> I believe so. NV4x has both the 0x18xx and 0x88xxx apertures I believe.
>
>>
>>> next thing would be to mmiotrace the binary driver and see if you can
>>> make it enable+use MSI on it. I doubt the current legacy driver does
>>> it by default, but there was some magic to enable it that you can
>>> probably find if you google around.
>>
>> I've yet to set up the legacy driver... I bet it doesn't compile on
>> 3.11, so I'll have to patch it to nuke procfs/i2c...
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> [ 307.049812] nouveau [ DEVICE][0000:04:00.0] BOOT0 : 0x034a00b1
>>>> [ 307.049815] nouveau [ DEVICE][0000:04:00.0] Chipset: NV34 (NV34)
>>>> [ 307.049819] nouveau [ DEVICE][0000:04:00.0] Family : NV30
>>>> [ 307.050648] nouveau [ VBIOS][0000:04:00.0] checking PRAMIN for image...
>>>> [ 307.050652] nouveau [ VBIOS][0000:04:00.0] ... signature not found
>>>> [ 307.050653] nouveau [ VBIOS][0000:04:00.0] checking PROM for image...
>>>> [ 307.195201] nouveau [ VBIOS][0000:04:00.0] ... appears to be valid
>>>> [ 307.195205] nouveau [ VBIOS][0000:04:00.0] using image from PROM
>>>> [ 307.195209] nouveau [ VBIOS][0000:04:00.0] BMP version 5.29
>>>> [ 307.195429] nouveau [ VBIOS][0000:04:00.0] version 04.34.20.79.00
>>>> [ 307.195971] nouveau [ DEVINIT][0000:04:00.0] adaptor not initialised
>>>> [ 307.195979] nouveau [ VBIOS][0000:04:00.0] running init tables
>>>> [ 307.209253] nouveau 0000:04:00.0: irq 47 for MSI/MSI-X
>>>> [ 307.209266] nouveau [ PMC][0000:04:00.0] MSI interrupts enabled
>>>> [ 307.209281] nouveau W[ PTIMER][0000:04:00.0] unknown input clock freq
>>>> [ 307.209288] nouveau [ PFB][0000:04:00.0] RAM type: DDR1
>>>> [ 307.209290] nouveau [ PFB][0000:04:00.0] RAM size: 64 MiB
>>>> [ 307.209292] nouveau [ PFB][0000:04:00.0] ZCOMP: 0 tags
>>>> [ 307.215653] nouveau [ DRM] VRAM: 63 MiB
>>>> [ 307.215656] nouveau [ DRM] GART: 128 MiB
>>>> [ 307.215659] nouveau [ DRM] BMP version 5.41
>>>> [ 307.215662] nouveau [ DRM] DCB version 2.2
>>>> [ 307.215666] nouveau [ DRM] DCB outp 00: 01000300 000088b8
>>>> [ 307.215669] nouveau [ DRM] DCB outp 01: 02010310 000088b8
>>>> [ 307.215672] nouveau [ DRM] DCB outp 02: 01000302 00000000
>>>> [ 307.215676] nouveau [ DRM] DCB outp 03: 04010312 00000000
>>>> [ 307.215686] nouveau [ DRM] Adaptor not initialised, running
>>>> VBIOS init tables.
>>>> [ 307.215964] nouveau [ DRM] Saving VGA fonts
>>>> [ 307.310084] [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010).
>>>> [ 307.310087] [drm] No driver support for vblank timestamp query.
>>>> [ 307.310093] nouveau [ DRM] 0xB61E: Parsing digital output script table
>>>> [ 307.360111] nouveau [ DRM] 0xB70B: Parsing digital output script table
>>>> [ 307.410799] nouveau [ DRM] 0 available performance level(s)
>>>> [ 307.410804] nouveau [ DRM] c: core 249MHz memory 405MHz
>>>> [ 307.412062] nouveau [ DRM] MM: using M2MF for buffer copies
>>>> [ 307.442478] nouveau 0000:04:00.0: No connectors reported connected with modes
>>>> [ 307.442483] [drm] Cannot find any crtc or sizes - going 1024x768
>>>> [ 307.442669] nouveau [ DRM] allocated 1024x768 fb: 0x9000, bo
>>>> ffff8801c73c3800
>>>> [...]
>>>> [ 360.414044] nouveau E[ X[8294]] failed to idle channel 0xcccc0001 [X[8294]]
>>>> [ 375.403288] nouveau E[ X[8294]] failed to idle channel 0xcccc0001 [X[8294]]
>>>> [ 390.392407] nouveau E[ X[8294]] failed to idle channel 0xcccc0001 [X[8294]]
>>>>
>>>> In case it's of interest, this is a Quadro NVS 280 card, here is the
>>>> lspci output:
>>>>
>>>> 04:00.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: NVIDIA Corporation NV37GL
>>>> [Quadro PCI-E Series] [10de:00fd] (rev a2) (prog-if 00 [VGA
>>>> controller])
>>>> Subsystem: NVIDIA Corporation Device [10de:0215]
>>>> Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop-
>>>> ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
>>>> Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort-
>>>> <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
>>>> Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes
>>>> Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 47
>>>> Region 0: Memory at f4000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16M]
>>>> Region 1: Memory at c0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M]
>>>> Region 2: Memory at f5000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16M]
>>>> [virtual] Expansion ROM at f6000000 [disabled] [size=128K]
>>>> Capabilities: [60] Power Management version 2
>>>> Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA
>>>> PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-)
>>>> Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
>>>> Capabilities: [68] MSI: Enable+ Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+
>>>> Address: 00000000feeff00c Data: 4162
>>>> Capabilities: [78] Express (v1) Legacy Endpoint, MSI 00
>>>> DevCap: MaxPayload 128 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s
>>>> <512ns, L1 <4us
>>>> ExtTag- AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE- FLReset-
>>>> DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal- Fatal-
>>>> Unsupported-
>>>> RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+
>>>> MaxPayload 128 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes
>>>> DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq-
>>>> AuxPwr- TransPend-
>>>> LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x16, ASPM L0s,
>>>> Latency L0 <2us, L1 <16us
>>>> ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot-
>>>> LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 128 bytes Disabled- Retrain- CommClk-
>>>> ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
>>>> LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x16, TrErr- Train-
>>>> SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt-
>>>> Capabilities: [100 v1] Virtual Channel
>>>> Caps: LPEVC=0 RefClk=100ns PATEntryBits=1
>>>> Arb: Fixed- WRR32- WRR64- WRR128-
>>>> Ctrl: ArbSelect=Fixed
>>>> Status: InProgress-
>>>> VC0: Caps: PATOffset=00 MaxTimeSlots=1 RejSnoopTrans-
>>>> Arb: Fixed- WRR32- WRR64- WRR128- TWRR128- WRR256-
>>>> Ctrl: Enable+ ID=0 ArbSelect=Fixed TC/VC=ff
>>>> Status: NegoPending- InProgress-
>>>> Capabilities: [128 v1] Power Budgeting <?>
>>>> Kernel driver in use: nouveau
>>>> Kernel modules: nouveau
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Let me know if you have any questions about my setup.
>>>>
>>>> -ilia
Same problem with the following (whitespace-damanged) diff applied on top:
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c
index 02b337e..68a51d4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mc/base.c
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ nouveau_mc_intr(int irq, void *arg)
}
if (pmc->use_msi)
- nv_wr08(pmc->base.base.parent, 0x00088068, 0xff);
+ nv_wr08(pmc->base.base.parent, 0x1868, 0xff);
if (intr) {
nv_error(pmc, "unknown intr 0x%08x\n", stat);
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ nouveau_mc_create_(struct nouveau_object *parent,
struct nouveau_object *engine,
if (ret) {
pmc->use_msi = false;
} else {
- nv_wr08(device, 0x00088068, 0xff);
+ nv_wr08(device, 0x1868, 0xff);
nv_info(pmc, "MSI interrupts enabled\n");
}
}
I guess this needs a way of telling whether it has "for real" MSI or
not. That 1800 range is on NV41:NV50 according to rnndb, which
probably means that it's safe to use msi on nv41+ (via the 88068
address, since the 1800 stuff disappears on nv50+). [Based purely on
speculation, btw, not on hardware experimentation. I assume
pci_enable_msi() would implicitly fail on any non-pcie card, e.g. nv4a
which is an agp version of nv44, and all the pci versions of the 6200
(and later) cards... i think there are some 8-series pci cards too.]
-ilia
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
