On 25.02.2020 08:49, Ye, Tony wrote:
>
>
> On 2/21/2020 11:32 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
>> From commit 84b1ca2f0e68 ("drm/i915/uc: prefer intel_gt over i915
>> in GuC/HuC paths") we stopped using HUC_STATUS error -ENODEV only
>> to indicate lack of HuC hardware and we started to use this error
>> also for all other cases when HuC was not in use or supported.
>>
>> Fix that by relying again on HAS_GT_UC macro, since currently
>> used function intel_huc_is_supported() is based on HuC firmware
>> support which could be unsupported also due to force disabled
>> GuC firmware.
>>
>> v2: use 0 only for disabled, add more error codes for other failures
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Tony Ye <tony.ye@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Robert M. Fosha <robert.m.fosha@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx> #v1
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c
>> index a74b65694512..301bb5d5e59a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c
>> @@ -200,9 +200,13 @@ int intel_huc_auth(struct intel_huc *huc)
>> * This function reads status register to verify if HuC
>> * firmware was successfully loaded.
>> *
>> - * Returns: 1 if HuC firmware is loaded and verified,
>> - * 0 if HuC firmware is not loaded and -ENODEV if HuC
>> - * is not present on this platform.
>> + * Returns:
>> + * * 1 if HuC firmware is loaded and verified,
>> + * * 0 if HuC firmware was disabled,
>> + * * -ENODEV if HuC is not present on this platform,
>> + * * -ENOPKG if HuC firmware was not installed,
>> + * * -ENOEXEC if HuC firmware is invalid,
>> + * * -EACCES if HuC firmware was not authenticated.
>> */
>> int intel_huc_check_status(struct intel_huc *huc)
>> {
>> @@ -210,11 +214,26 @@ int intel_huc_check_status(struct intel_huc *huc)
>> intel_wakeref_t wakeref;
>> u32 status = 0;
>> - if (!intel_huc_is_supported(huc))
>> + if (!HAS_GT_UC(gt->i915))
>> return -ENODEV;
>> + switch (__intel_uc_fw_status(&huc->fw)) {
>> + case INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_NOT_SUPPORTED:
>> + case INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_DISABLED:
>> + return 0;
>> + case INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_MISSING:
>> + return -ENOPKG;
>> + case INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_ERROR:
>> + return -ENOEXEC;
>
> What about INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_FAIL?
I assumed that we don't need to handle that case here, since we are
still checking HuC status register below.
But if you want we can improve:
1) return early if FAIL, then check register anyway
2) return early if FAIL, trust fw state and return 1 without checking
register (as same register was already checked when we mark fw state as
RUNNING)
>
> Regards,
> Tony
>
>> + default:
>> + break;
>> + }
>> +
>> with_intel_runtime_pm(gt->uncore->rpm, wakeref)
>> status = intel_uncore_read(gt->uncore, huc->status.reg);
>> - return (status & huc->status.mask) == huc->status.value;
>> + if ((status & huc->status.mask) != huc->status.value)
>> + return -EACCES;
>> +
>> + return 1;
>> }
>>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
