On Tue, 2020-06-30 at 17:28 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 02:20:58PM -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> > This fix some possible corruptions.
> >
> > BSpec: 52755
> > BSpec: 52890
> > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 3 +++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 8 +++++++-
> > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > index 284af0c6439c..797e036fa695 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > @@ -4170,6 +4170,9 @@ enum {
> > #define INF_UNIT_LEVEL_CLKGATE _MMIO(0x9560)
> > #define CGPSF_CLKGATE_DIS (1 << 3)
> >
> > +#define SLICE_UNIT_LEVEL_CLOCK_GATING_CTL _MMIO(0x94D8)
> > +#define GS_UNIT_CLOCK_GATING_DIS REG_BIT(24)
> > +
> > /*
> > * Display engine regs
> > */
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > index 2a32d6230795..86408173c435 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > @@ -7113,7 +7113,7 @@ static void tgl_init_clock_gating(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > I915_WRITE(POWERGATE_ENABLE,
> > I915_READ(POWERGATE_ENABLE) | vd_pg_enable);
> >
> > - /* Wa_1409825376:tgl (pre-prod)*/
> > + /* Wa_1409825376:tgl (pre-prod) */
> > if (IS_TGL_REVID(dev_priv, TGL_REVID_A0, TGL_REVID_A0))
> > I915_WRITE(GEN9_CLKGATE_DIS_3, I915_READ(GEN9_CLKGATE_DIS_3) |
> > TGL_VRH_GATING_DIS);
> > @@ -7121,6 +7121,12 @@ static void tgl_init_clock_gating(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > /* Wa_14011059788:tgl */
> > intel_uncore_rmw(&dev_priv->uncore, GEN10_DFR_RATIO_EN_AND_CHICKEN,
> > 0, DFR_DISABLE);
> > +
> > + /* Wa_18011464164:tgl */
> > + if (IS_TGL_REVID(dev_priv, TGL_REVID_B0, TGL_REVID_B0))
> > + intel_uncore_rmw(&dev_priv->uncore,
> > + SLICE_UNIT_LEVEL_CLOCK_GATING_CTL, 0,
> > + GS_UNIT_CLOCK_GATING_DIS);
>
> This looks like a gt w/a, so shouldn't be here preobably. We also have
> a very similarly named register already at 0x94d4, so the register
> name probably needs some work too.
We register in the same class as this one being set in clock_gating functions and as this one have "CustomGTIIs_ContextSaved: true" we don't need to
worry about reprogram it after a reset.About the name you are right, renaming to SLICE_UNIT_LEVEL_CLKGATE_CTL_94D8 as BSpec adds the offset to the
name as there is a bunch of SLICE_UNIT_LEVEL_CLKGATE_CTL registers.
>
> > }
> >
> > static void cnp_init_clock_gating(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > --
> > 2.27.0
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
