Re: [PATCH v3] drm/i915/guc: Propagate the fw xfer timeout

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 23/10/18 01:50, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Daniele Ceraolo Spurio (2018-10-18 21:48:30)


On 18/10/18 12:55, Chris Wilson wrote:
Propagate the timeout on transferring the fw back to the caller where it
may act upon it, usually by restarting the xfer before failing.

v2: Simplify the wait to only wait upon the guc signaling completion,
with an assertion that the fw xfer must have completed for it to be
ready!

Testcase: igt/drv_selftest/live_hangcheck
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx>
---
   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c | 106 +++++++++++++---------------
   1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
index a9e6fcce467c..51b292001edd 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
@@ -125,66 +125,26 @@ static void guc_prepare_xfer(struct intel_guc *guc)
   }
/* Copy RSA signature from the fw image to HW for verification */
-static int guc_xfer_rsa(struct intel_guc *guc, struct i915_vma *vma)
+static void guc_xfer_rsa(struct intel_guc *guc, struct i915_vma *vma)
   {
       struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
-     struct intel_uc_fw *guc_fw = &guc->fw;
-     struct sg_table *sg = vma->pages;
       u32 rsa[UOS_RSA_SCRATCH_COUNT];
       int i;
- if (sg_pcopy_to_buffer(sg->sgl, sg->nents, rsa, sizeof(rsa),
-                            guc_fw->rsa_offset) != sizeof(rsa))
-             return -EINVAL;
+     sg_pcopy_to_buffer(vma->pages->sgl, vma->pages->nents,
+                        rsa, sizeof(rsa), guc->fw.rsa_offset);
for (i = 0; i < UOS_RSA_SCRATCH_COUNT; i++)
               I915_WRITE(UOS_RSA_SCRATCH(i), rsa[i]);
-
-     return 0;
   }
-/*
- * Transfer the firmware image to RAM for execution by the microcontroller.
- *
- * Architecturally, the DMA engine is bidirectional, and can potentially even
- * transfer between GTT locations. This functionality is left out of the API
- * for now as there is no need for it.
- */
-static int guc_xfer_ucode(struct intel_guc *guc, struct i915_vma *vma)
+static bool guc_xfer_completed(struct intel_guc *guc, u32 *status)
   {
       struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
-     struct intel_uc_fw *guc_fw = &guc->fw;
-     unsigned long offset;
-     u32 status;
-     int ret;
-
-     /*
-      * The header plus uCode will be copied to WOPCM via DMA, excluding any
-      * other components
-      */
-     I915_WRITE(DMA_COPY_SIZE, guc_fw->header_size + guc_fw->ucode_size);
-
-     /* Set the source address for the new blob */
-     offset = intel_guc_ggtt_offset(guc, vma) + guc_fw->header_offset;
-     I915_WRITE(DMA_ADDR_0_LOW, lower_32_bits(offset));
-     I915_WRITE(DMA_ADDR_0_HIGH, upper_32_bits(offset) & 0xFFFF);
- /*
-      * Set the DMA destination. Current uCode expects the code to be
-      * loaded at 8k; locations below this are used for the stack.
-      */
-     I915_WRITE(DMA_ADDR_1_LOW, 0x2000);
-     I915_WRITE(DMA_ADDR_1_HIGH, DMA_ADDRESS_SPACE_WOPCM);
-
-     /* Finally start the DMA */
-     I915_WRITE(DMA_CTRL, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(UOS_MOVE | START_DMA));
-
-     /* Wait for DMA to finish */
-     ret = __intel_wait_for_register_fw(dev_priv, DMA_CTRL, START_DMA, 0,
-                                        2, 100, &status);
-     DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("GuC DMA status %#x\n", status);
-
-     return ret;
+     /* Did we complete the xfer? */
+     *status = I915_READ(DMA_CTRL);
+     return !(*status & START_DMA);
   }
/*
@@ -228,9 +188,51 @@ static int guc_wait_ucode(struct intel_guc *guc)
               ret = -ENOEXEC;
       }
+ if (ret == 0 && !guc_xfer_completed(guc, &status)) {
+             DRM_ERROR("GuC is ready, but the xfer %08x is incomplete\n",
+                       status);
+             ret = -ENXIO;

Do we want to allow reset & retry in this scenario? This feels like
something weird happening in HW, so I'd say it'd be worth to allow a retry.

It strikes me as being very weird. Report and bail to see if it ever
occurs before trying to decide on how exactly to reset and retry.
-Chris


Sounds reasonable.

Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx>

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [AMD Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux