Re: [PATCH v2 15/22] drm/i915/huc: New HuC status register for Gen11

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

 



On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 23:19:40 +0200, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On 4/11/19 1:44 AM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
Gen11 defines new register for checking HuC authentication status.
Look into the right register and bit.
 BSpec: 19686
 Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tony Ye <tony.ye@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: John Spotswood <john.a.spotswood@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa@xxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_reg.h |  3 ++
  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c     | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
  2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_reg.h
index d26de5193568..7eba65795b58 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_reg.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_reg.h
@@ -79,6 +79,9 @@
  #define HUC_STATUS2             _MMIO(0xD3B0)
  #define   HUC_FW_VERIFIED       (1<<7)
  +#define GEN11_HUC_KERNEL_LOAD_INFO	_MMIO(0xC1DC)
+#define   HUC_LOAD_SUCCESSFUL		  (1 << 0)
+
  #define GUC_WOPCM_SIZE			_MMIO(0xc050)
  #define   GUC_WOPCM_SIZE_LOCKED		  (1<<0)
  #define   GUC_WOPCM_SIZE_SHIFT		12
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c
index 94c04f16a2ad..708a4b387259 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c
@@ -40,6 +40,47 @@ int intel_huc_init_misc(struct intel_huc *huc)
  	return 0;
  }
  +static int gen8_huc_wait_verified(struct intel_huc *huc)

why gen8?

+{
+	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = huc_to_i915(huc);
+	u32 status;
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = __intel_wait_for_register(&i915->uncore,
+					HUC_STATUS2,
+					HUC_FW_VERIFIED,
+					HUC_FW_VERIFIED,
+					2, 50, &status);
+	if (ret)
+		DRM_ERROR("HuC: status %#x\n", status);
+	return ret;
+}
+
+static int gen11_huc_wait_verified(struct intel_huc *huc)
+{
+	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = huc_to_i915(huc);
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = __intel_wait_for_register(&i915->uncore,
+					GEN11_HUC_KERNEL_LOAD_INFO,
+					HUC_LOAD_SUCCESSFUL,
+					HUC_LOAD_SUCCESSFUL,
+					2, 50, NULL);
+	return ret;
+}
+
+static int huc_wait_verified(struct intel_huc *huc)

We do call this only once, so maybe we can just avoid having a separate function and just have it directly in intel_huc_auth? the code is simple enough. Otherwise, to avoid 2 identical functions which diff only in the register details,

There was one small diff: in case of timeout, pre-gen11 variant was printing
whole HuC status value. But maybe we don't care any more...

we could save the register and the expected value in the huc struct during init_early and just wait on (huc->auth.reg & huc->auth.mask), which we could also use in intel_huc_check_status().

To be more future ready, we should store reg/mask/value tuple.

Btw, is it ok that intel_huc_check_status() will now return different
values depending on gen (was 1<<7, now 1<<0) for status ?

Note that intel_huc_check_status() is used directly in I915_PARAM_HUC_STATUS.
Maybe we should try to unify these and always return just 0 and fixed 1 ?
Does it count as uABI change ?


Apart from this, register values do match the FW and the specs.

Daniele

+{
+	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = huc_to_i915(huc);
+	int ret;
+
+	if (INTEL_GEN(i915) >= 11)
+		ret = gen11_huc_wait_verified(huc);
+	else
+		ret = gen8_huc_wait_verified(huc);
+	return ret;
+}
+
  /**
   * intel_huc_auth() - Authenticate HuC uCode
   * @huc: intel_huc structure
@@ -56,7 +97,6 @@ int intel_huc_auth(struct intel_huc *huc)
  	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = huc_to_i915(huc);
  	struct intel_guc *guc = &i915->guc;
  	struct i915_vma *vma;
-	u32 status;
  	int ret;
    	if (huc->fw.load_status != INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_SUCCESS)
@@ -79,13 +119,9 @@ int intel_huc_auth(struct intel_huc *huc)
  	}
    	/* Check authentication status, it should be done by now */
-	ret = __intel_wait_for_register(&i915->uncore,
-					HUC_STATUS2,
-					HUC_FW_VERIFIED,
-					HUC_FW_VERIFIED,
-					2, 50, &status);
+	ret = huc_wait_verified(huc);
  	if (ret) {
-		DRM_ERROR("HuC: Firmware not verified %#x\n", status);
+		DRM_ERROR("HuC: Firmware not verified %d\n", ret);
  		goto fail_unpin;
  	}
  @@ -122,7 +158,11 @@ int intel_huc_check_status(struct intel_huc *huc)
  		return -ENODEV;
    	with_intel_runtime_pm(dev_priv, wakeref)
-		status = I915_READ(HUC_STATUS2) & HUC_FW_VERIFIED;
+		if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 11)
+			status = I915_READ(GEN11_HUC_KERNEL_LOAD_INFO) &
+				HUC_LOAD_SUCCESSFUL;
+		else
+			status = I915_READ(HUC_STATUS2) & HUC_FW_VERIFIED;
    	return status;
  }
_______________________________________________
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