Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-08-21 08:58:26)
>> Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > Since we no longer maintain our read position in the CSB pointers
>> > register, it always returns 0 and not where we last read up to. As a
>> > result the CSB probing in the state dumper starts from 0, either missing
>> > entries or showing stale one.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
>> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
>> > index 8628567d8f6e..49b580c188eb 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
>> > @@ -1345,20 +1345,20 @@ static void intel_engine_print_registers(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
>> >
>> > if (HAS_EXECLISTS(dev_priv)) {
>> > const u32 *hws = &engine->status_page.page_addr[I915_HWS_CSB_BUF0_INDEX];
>> > - u32 ptr, read, write;
>> > unsigned int idx;
>> > + u8 read, write;
>> >
>> > drm_printf(m, "\tExeclist status: 0x%08x %08x\n",
>> > I915_READ(RING_EXECLIST_STATUS_LO(engine)),
>> > I915_READ(RING_EXECLIST_STATUS_HI(engine)));
>> >
>> > - ptr = I915_READ(RING_CONTEXT_STATUS_PTR(engine));
>> > - read = GEN8_CSB_READ_PTR(ptr);
>> > - write = GEN8_CSB_WRITE_PTR(ptr);
>> > - drm_printf(m, "\tExeclist CSB read %d [%d cached], write %d [%d from hws], tasklet queued? %s (%s)\n",
>> > - read, execlists->csb_head,
>> > - write,
>> > - intel_read_status_page(engine, intel_hws_csb_write_index(engine->i915)),
>> > + read = execlists->csb_head;
>> > + write = intel_read_status_page(engine,
>> > + intel_hws_csb_write_index(dev_priv));
>> > +
>> > + drm_printf(m, "\tExeclist CSB read %d, write %d [mmio:%d], tasklet queued? %s (%s)\n",
>> > + read, write,
>>
>> In here I was thinking that we want to keep the write as 32bit so it
>> would show weirdness in here with %d. But the odds of that to happen
>> with only in this status page entry...
>
> Hmm, it was u8 for automatically truncating execlists->csb_write...
> Oh, this should have been write = READ_ONCE(*execlists->csb_write);
>
> Mind if I make that change?
Please do.
-Mika
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
