On 03/23/2018 05:34 AM, Michał Winiarski wrote:
We need GuC to load HuC, but it's also possible for GuC to operate on
its own. We don't know what the size of HuC FW may be, so, not wanting
to make any platform-specific hardcoded guesses, we assume that its size
is 0... Which is a very bad approximation.
This has a very unfortunate consequence - once we've booted with GuC and
no HuC, we'll never be able to load HuC (unless we reboot, since the
registers are locked).
Rather than using unknown values in our computations - let's partition
based on GuC size.
we can do this based on known GuC and HuC sizes without
any assumption on FW sizes :)
please also refer to: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/40541/
We have one HW restriction where we're using HuC size (GuC size needs to
be roughly similar to HuC size - which may be unknown at this point),
luckily, another HW restriction makes it very unlikely to run in any
sort of issues in this case.
Signed-off-by: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jackie Li <yaodong.li@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wopcm.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wopcm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wopcm.c
index 52841d340002..295d302e97b9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wopcm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wopcm.c
@@ -167,7 +167,22 @@ static int check_ctx_rsvd_fits(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm, u32 ctx_rsvd)
return 0;
}
-static int wopcm_check_hw_restrictions(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
+static inline void
+__guc_region_grow(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm, u32 size)
+{
+ /*
+ * We're growing guc region in the direction of lower addresses.
+ * We need to use multiples of base alignment, because it has more
+ * strict alignment rules.
+ */
+ size = DIV_ROUND_UP(size, 2);
A bit confused here. Don't we just want to push the base downward for
*size* bytes?
+ size = ALIGN(size, GUC_WOPCM_OFFSET_ALIGNMENT);
Hmm, I think we only need align it to 4K boundary.
+
+ wopcm->guc.base -= size;
+ wopcm->guc.size += size;
+}
+
+static void wopcm_adjust_for_hw_restrictions(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
{
struct drm_i915_private *i915 = wopcm_to_i915(wopcm);
u32 huc_fw_size = intel_uc_fw_get_upload_size(&i915->huc.fw);
@@ -177,22 +192,18 @@ static int wopcm_check_hw_restrictions(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
size = gen9_size_for_dword_gap_restriction(wopcm->guc.base,
wopcm->guc.size);
if (size)
- goto err;
+ __guc_region_grow(wopcm, size);
size = gen9_size_for_huc_restriction(wopcm->guc.size,
huc_fw_size);
Note that huc_fw_size might be zero in enable_guc=1 (GuC only) case.
Once the registers were locked, enable_guc=3 may still fail since
huc_fw_size
may still large enough to break the restriction we want to enforce that:
hw_fw_size + 16KB > guc_fw_size.
if (size)
- goto err;
- }
-
- return 0;
+ __guc_region_grow(wopcm, size);
-err:
- DRM_ERROR("GuC WOPCM size %uKiB is too small. %uKiB more needed.\n",
- wopcm->guc.size / 1024,
- size / 1024);
-
- return -E2BIG;
+ GEM_BUG_ON(gen9_size_for_dword_gap_restriction(wopcm->guc.base,
+ wopcm->guc.size));
+ GEM_BUG_ON(gen9_size_for_huc_restriction(wopcm->guc.size,
+ huc_fw_size));
+ }
}
static bool wopcm_check_components_fit(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
@@ -218,21 +229,16 @@ static bool wopcm_check_components_fit(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
return 0;
}
-static int wopcm_guc_init(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
+static int wopcm_guc_region_init(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = wopcm_to_i915(wopcm);
- u32 huc_fw_size = intel_uc_fw_get_upload_size(&dev_priv->huc.fw);
+ u32 guc_fw_size = intel_uc_fw_get_upload_size(&dev_priv->guc.fw);
u32 ctx_rsvd = context_reserved_size(dev_priv);
- wopcm->guc.base = ALIGN_DOWN(huc_fw_size_in_wopcm(huc_fw_size),
- GUC_WOPCM_OFFSET_ALIGNMENT);
+ wopcm->guc.size = guc_fw_size_in_wopcm(guc_fw_size);
- wopcm->guc.size = ALIGN(wopcm->size - wopcm->guc.base - ctx_rsvd,
- PAGE_SIZE);
-
- DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("GuC WOPCM Region: [%uKiB, %uKiB)\n",
- wopcm->guc.base / 1024,
- (wopcm->guc.base + wopcm->guc.size) / 1024);
+ wopcm->guc.base = ALIGN_DOWN(wopcm->size - ctx_rsvd - wopcm->guc.size,
+ GUC_WOPCM_OFFSET_ALIGNMENT);
guc.size + ctx_rsvd > wopcm->size check?
return 0;
}
@@ -255,18 +261,20 @@ int intel_wopcm_init(struct intel_wopcm *wopcm)
GEM_BUG_ON(!wopcm->size);
- err = wopcm_guc_init(wopcm);
+ err = wopcm_guc_region_init(wopcm);
Again, wopcm will contain invalid data on failure. But maybe we can
go with it now :)
Regards,
-Jackie
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
