>-----Original Message----- >From: Wajdeczko, Michal >Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:27 AM >To: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Joonas Lahtinen ><joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Srivatsa, Anusha ><anusha.srivatsa@xxxxxxxxx>; Ye, Tony <tony.ye@xxxxxxxxx> >Cc: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx>; Chris Wilson ><chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Turn on GuC/HuC auto mode > >On Tue, 09 Jul 2019 16:17:02 +0200, Joonas Lahtinen ><joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Better subject would be: "Enable HuC (through GuC) on supported >> platforms" > >Such subject sounds better, but on one hand it does not reflect real code change >(since we are not explicitly enabling HuC, but instead we are just letting the driver >enable GuC/HuC to whatever mode it decides), but on other hand this is what >actual outcome of the change is (as i915 currently enables GuC loading with HuC >authentication on every platform where corresponding firmwares are >defined/available, and nothing more). > >Please confirm if you still opt-in to use your subject. > >> >> Quoting Michal Wajdeczko (2019-07-03 14:36:40) >>> GuC firmware is now mature, so let it run by default. >> >> That's bit of a misleading statement (in more than one way). > >It's mature enough to perform HuC authentication, and we don't expect more >from it ;) > >> >> "Enable loading HuC firmware (through GuC) to unlock advanced video >> codecs on supported platforms. >> >> GuC firmware is required to authenticate the HuC firmware, which is a >> requirement for it to operate." > >To some extend this duplicates existing "DOC: HuC Firmware" >Do we need to repeat that again here? > >> >> Has the most recent firmware been merged to linux-firmware and is it >> present in our CI systems? > >My understanding is: No and Yes. >Maybe Anusha can provide more details here. Waiting on the firmware to get merged to linux-firmware. Sent the PR. The latest firmware is however available on our CI. Anusha >> >> It would also be good to list what kind of tests have been run to >> ensure that there are no regressions, > >I'm afraid on IGT level we don't have HuC tests. >But media team was using modparam override to force GuC/HuC for a while, >Tony do you have such test list/results handy? > >> and which platforms >> this change affects. > >This change affects all platforms where we have GuC/HuC firmwares defined, so: >SKL, BXT, KBL, CFL, ICL. > >Note that we'll still have possibility to tweak that inside driver, as auto mode is >just moving responsibility what can be enabled from the user to the i915. > >> >> Regards, Joonas >> >>> Note that today GuC is only used for HuC authentication. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h >>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h >>> index d29ade3b7de6..5736c55694fe 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h >>> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ struct drm_printer; >>> param(int, disable_power_well, -1) \ >>> param(int, enable_ips, 1) \ >>> param(int, invert_brightness, 0) \ >>> - param(int, enable_guc, 0) \ >>> + param(int, enable_guc, -1) \ >>> param(int, guc_log_level, -1) \ >>> param(char *, guc_firmware_path, NULL) \ >>> param(char *, huc_firmware_path, NULL) \ >>> -- >>> 2.19.2 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
