On 11/14/2017 5:53 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 09:48:11 +0100, Sagar Arun Kamble
<sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
i915 GuC submission is hardware interface and GuC APIs that are not user
facing should be named intel_guc* hence we change GuC submission related
functions name prefix to intel_guc. Also changed the parameter to these
functions to intel_guc struct.
Suggested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Michal Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Arkadiusz Hiler <arkadiusz.hiler@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c | 39
++++++++++++++----------------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.h | 8 +++---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c | 10 ++++----
3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
index 0ba2fc0..42dc5b4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
@@ -683,13 +683,13 @@ static void wait_for_guc_preempt_report(struct
intel_engine_cs *engine)
}
/**
- * i915_guc_submit() - Submit commands through GuC
+ * intel_guc_submit() - Submit commands through GuC
* @engine: engine associated with the commands
*
* The only error here arises if the doorbell hardware isn't
functioning
* as expected, which really shouln't happen.
^
While here, please fix this old typo.
Yes.
*/
-static void i915_guc_submit(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+static void intel_guc_submit(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
Hmm, this is static function and neither old or new name looks good
or correct as function takes engine as parameter not guc.
What about plain and simple "submit_through_guc(engine)" ?
Or more formal "engine_submit_through_guc(engine)" ?
How about "guc_submit(engine)" & "guc_dequeue(engine)" vis-a-vis
"execlists_submit_ports" & "execlists_dequeue"
I think ports are not visible with GuC hence we may not say
guc_submit_ports. agree?
{
struct intel_guc *guc = &engine->i915->guc;
struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists =
&engine->execlists;
@@ -722,7 +722,7 @@ static void port_assign(struct execlist_port *port,
port_set(port, port_pack(i915_gem_request_get(rq),
port_count(port)));
}
-static void i915_guc_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+static void intel_guc_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
and then matching "dequeue_and_submit(engine)"
{
struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists =
&engine->execlists;
struct execlist_port *port = execlists->port;
@@ -793,13 +793,13 @@ static void i915_guc_dequeue(struct
intel_engine_cs *engine)
if (submit) {
port_assign(port, last);
execlists_set_active(execlists, EXECLISTS_ACTIVE_USER);
- i915_guc_submit(engine);
+ intel_guc_submit(engine);
}
unlock:
spin_unlock_irq(&engine->timeline->lock);
}
-static void i915_guc_irq_handler(unsigned long data)
+static void intel_guc_irq_handler(unsigned long data)
and verbose "guc_submission_handler()" ?
Yes. Should we rename irq_tasklet to submission_tasklet?
then we can s/intel_lrc_irq_handler/execlists_submission_tasklet and
s/i915_guc_irq_handler/guc_submission_tasklet.
Again trying to maintain the nomenclature consistency for Execlists and GuC.
{
struct intel_engine_cs * const engine = (struct intel_engine_cs
*)data;
struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists =
&engine->execlists;
@@ -831,13 +831,13 @@ static void i915_guc_irq_handler(unsigned long
data)
}
if (!execlists_is_active(execlists, EXECLISTS_ACTIVE_PREEMPT))
- i915_guc_dequeue(engine);
+ intel_guc_dequeue(engine);
}
/*
* Everything below here is concerned with setup & teardown, and is
* therefore not part of the somewhat time-critical batch-submission
- * path of i915_guc_submit() above.
+ * path of intel_guc_submit() above.
*/
/* Check that a doorbell register is in the expected state */
@@ -1253,9 +1253,8 @@ static void guc_preempt_work_destroy(struct
intel_guc *guc)
* Set up the memory resources to be shared with the GuC (via the GGTT)
* at firmware loading time.
*/
-int i915_guc_submission_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
+int intel_guc_submission_init(struct intel_guc *guc)
{
- struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
int ret;
if (guc->stage_desc_pool)
@@ -1302,10 +1301,8 @@ int i915_guc_submission_init(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
return ret;
}
-void i915_guc_submission_fini(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
+void intel_guc_submission_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
{
- struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
-
guc_ads_destroy(guc);
guc_preempt_work_destroy(guc);
intel_guc_log_destroy(guc);
@@ -1381,19 +1378,19 @@ static void guc_interrupts_release(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
rps->pm_intrmsk_mbz &= ~ARAT_EXPIRED_INTRMSK;
}
-static void i915_guc_submission_park(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+static void intel_guc_submission_park(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
{
intel_engine_unpin_breadcrumbs_irq(engine);
}
-static void i915_guc_submission_unpark(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+static void intel_guc_submission_unpark(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
Both park/unpark are also static and do not require "intel" prefix.
Yes.
{
intel_engine_pin_breadcrumbs_irq(engine);
}
-int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
+int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc)
{
- struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
+ struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
struct intel_engine_cs *engine;
enum intel_engine_id id;
int err;
@@ -1439,9 +1436,9 @@ int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
for_each_engine(engine, dev_priv, id) {
struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists =
&engine->execlists;
- execlists->irq_tasklet.func = i915_guc_irq_handler;
- engine->park = i915_guc_submission_park;
- engine->unpark = i915_guc_submission_unpark;
+ execlists->irq_tasklet.func = intel_guc_irq_handler;
+ engine->park = intel_guc_submission_park;
+ engine->unpark = intel_guc_submission_unpark;
Then we'll have:
execlists->irq_tasklet.func = guc_submission_handler;
engine->park = guc_submission_park;
engine->unpark = guc_submission_unpark;
}
return 0;
@@ -1451,9 +1448,9 @@ int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
return err;
}
-void i915_guc_submission_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
+void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc)
{
- struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
+ struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
GEM_BUG_ON(dev_priv->gt.awake); /* GT should be parked first */
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.h
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.h
index cb4353b..6bdb8fc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.h
@@ -72,9 +72,9 @@ struct i915_guc_client {
u64 submissions[I915_NUM_ENGINES];
};
-int i915_guc_submission_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
-int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
-void i915_guc_submission_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
-void i915_guc_submission_fini(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
+int intel_guc_submission_init(struct intel_guc *guc);
+int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc);
+void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc);
+void intel_guc_submission_fini(struct intel_guc *guc);
#endif
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
index aec2954..775db48 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private
*dev_priv)
* This is stuff we need to have available at fw load time
* if we are planning to enable submission later
*/
- ret = i915_guc_submission_init(dev_priv);
+ ret = intel_guc_submission_init(guc);
if (ret)
goto err_guc;
}
@@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private
*dev_priv)
if (i915_modparams.guc_log_level >= 0)
gen9_enable_guc_interrupts(dev_priv);
- ret = i915_guc_submission_enable(dev_priv);
+ ret = intel_guc_submission_enable(guc);
if (ret)
goto err_interrupts;
}
@@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private
*dev_priv)
guc_capture_load_err_log(guc);
err_submission:
if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission)
- i915_guc_submission_fini(dev_priv);
+ intel_guc_submission_fini(guc);
err_guc:
i915_ggtt_disable_guc(dev_priv);
@@ -277,13 +277,13 @@ void intel_uc_fini_hw(struct drm_i915_private
*dev_priv)
return;
if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission)
- i915_guc_submission_disable(dev_priv);
+ intel_guc_submission_disable(&dev_priv->guc);
guc_disable_communication(&dev_priv->guc);
if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission) {
gen9_disable_guc_interrupts(dev_priv);
- i915_guc_submission_fini(dev_priv);
+ intel_guc_submission_fini(&dev_priv->guc);
Better to declare local variable guc and use them in all places.
Yes.
}
i915_ggtt_disable_guc(dev_priv);
Michal
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
