On 02/14/2018 09:38 AM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 03:26:12 +0100, Yaodong Li <yaodong.li@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 02/13/2018 07:56 AM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
Also, comparing again your drawing with the spec I think it
should look like this:
+-------- +====================+ <== WOPCM top
/|\ | HW RESERVED |
| +------------------- +
| | |
| +-- +====================+ <== GuC WOPCM top
| /|\ | |
| | | |
| GuC | |
| WOPCM | GuC firmware |
| size | |
WOPCM | +--------------------+
size \|/ | GuC reserved |
| +-- +====================+ <== GuC WOPCM base (offset from
WOPCM base)
| | WOPCM RESERVED |
| +--------------------+
\|/ | HuC firmware |
+-------- +====================+ <== WOPCM base
+
+/* GUC WOPCM offset needs to be 16KB aligned. */
+#define GUC_WOPCM_OFFSET_ALIGNMENT (16 << 10)
+/* 16KB reserved at the beginning of GuC WOPCM. */
+#define GUC_WOPCM_RESERVED (16 << 10)
+/* 8KB from GUC_WOPCM_RESERVED is reserved for GuC stack. */
+#define GUC_WOPCM_STACK_RESERVED (8 << 10)
+/* 24KB at the end of GuC WOPCM is reserved for RC6 CTX on BXT. */
+#define BXT_GUC_WOPCM_RC6_CTX_RESERVED (24 << 10)
Hmm, I'm still not convinced that we correctly attach it to "GuC
WOPCM".
In the result, maybe we should stop focusing on "intel_guc_wopcm"
and define
everything as "intel_wopcm" as it was earlier suggested by Joonas.
Then we can define our struct to match diagram above as
struct intel_wopcm {
u32 size;
struct {
u32 base;
u32 size;
} guc;
};
u32 intel_wopcm_guc_top(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
{
return wopcm->guc.base + wopcm->guc.size;
}
More comments about the *top*:-)
The *top* we used in driver code to verify where the non-wopcm guc
memory
allocation starts is the offset value from guc.base to WOPCM_TOP. so
we don't need to
add the guc.base to it.
From GuC point of view the *top* (boundary between wopcm and
non-wopcm memory)
is like:
+------------------+ <=== GuC memory end
Non WOPCM
+------------------+ <=== *top* (This is actually in top of the whole
WOPCM)
CTX Rsvd
+------------------+ <=== *__top* (wopcm->guc.size)
WOPCM
+------------------+ <=== guc base (wopcm->guc.base)
actually, we had a discussion whether we should set the guc wopcm and
non-wopcm
boundary to *__top* but the suggestion we got is to stick to the spec
description which
says to allocate "non-wopcm memory starts from WOPCM TOP"(even if it
seems
we could use *__top* as the boundary:-)). and it's because of this
reason we called the
wopcm from guc_base to *top* as GuC WOPCM since we count the wopcm
between
*__top* to *top* as a part of GuC address space while trying to
allocate non-wopcm
for GuC (even though GuC won't access CTX Rsvd at allO:-)).
Ok, so we should program GUC_WOPCM_SIZE to wopcm->guc.size and then
use (wopcm->size - wopcm->guc.base) as offset to i915_vma_pin, right?
All values of size and top are relevant to guc.base (offsets from
guc.base), and currently
we are using guc.size + hole between guc.size and ctx reserved (if any)
+ ctx reserved size
as the offset to i915_vma_pin as it's the actual WOPCM_TOP.:-)
Regards,
-Jackie
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
