On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 01:50:46PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Ville Syrj?l?
> <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 05:15:41PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> >> Hi Ville,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the comments.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Ville Syrj?l?
> >> <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 09:25:12PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> >> >> WaFbcNukeOn3DBlt for IVB, HSW and VLV.
> >> >
> >> > VLV doesn't have FBC, so this is a bit incorrect.
> >>
> >> I'm going to remove the vlv mention that incorrectly came from spec...
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> According BSPec: "Workaround: Do not enable Render Command Streamer tracking for FBC.
> >> >> Instead insert a LRI to address 0x50380 with data 0x00000004 after the PIPE_CONTROL that
> >> >> follows each render submission."
> >> >>
> >> >> v2: Chris noticed that flush_domains check was missing here and also suggested to do
> >> >> LRI only when fbc is enabled. To avoid do a I915_READ on every flush lets use the
> >> >> module parameter check.
> >> >>
> >> >> v3: Adding Wa name as Damien suggested.
> >> >>
> >> >> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at gmail.com>
> >> >> ---
> >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 2 ++
> >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 2 +-
> >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> >> 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> >> >> index cc4c223..81ac584 100644
> >> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> >> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> >> >> @@ -977,6 +977,8 @@
> >> >> /* Framebuffer compression for Ivybridge */
> >> >> #define IVB_FBC_RT_BASE 0x7020
> >> >>
> >> >> +#define MSG_FBC_REND_STATE 0x50380
> >> >> +#define FBC_REND_NUKE (1<<2)
> >> >>
> >> >> #define _HSW_PIPE_SLICE_CHICKEN_1_A 0x420B0
> >> >> #define _HSW_PIPE_SLICE_CHICKEN_1_B 0x420B4
> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> >> >> index 1879188..e830a9b 100644
> >> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> >> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> >> >> @@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ static void gen7_enable_fbc(struct drm_crtc *crtc, unsigned long interval)
> >> >> struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = intel_fb->obj;
> >> >> struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc);
> >> >>
> >> >> - I915_WRITE(IVB_FBC_RT_BASE, obj->gtt_offset | ILK_FBC_RT_VALID);
> >> >> + I915_WRITE(IVB_FBC_RT_BASE, obj->gtt_offset);
> >> >>
> >> >> if (!intel_edp_is_psr_enabled(dev))
> >> >> I915_WRITE(ILK_DPFC_CONTROL, DPFC_CTL_EN | DPFC_CTL_LIMIT_1X |
> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> >> >> index 3d2c236..69491db 100644
> >> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> >> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> >> >> @@ -280,6 +280,30 @@ gen7_render_ring_cs_stall_wa(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring)
> >> >> return 0;
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> +static int gen7_ring_fbc_flush(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring)
> >> >> +{
> >> >> + struct drm_device *dev = ring->dev;
> >> >> + int ret;
> >> >> +
> >> >> + if (i915_enable_fbc == 0)
> >> >> + return 0;
> >> >> +
> >> >> + if (i915_enable_fbc < 0 && !IS_HASWELL(dev))
> >> >> + return 0;
> >> >> +
> >> >> + ret = intel_ring_begin(ring, 4);
> >> >> + if (ret)
> >> >> + return ret;
> >> >> + intel_ring_emit(ring, MI_NOOP);
> >> >> + /* WaFbcNukeOn3DBlt:ivb/hsw/vlv */
> >> >
> >> > Another mention of vlv. I can see BSpec makes the same mistake in
> >> > the register description though.
> >>
> >> ... as you noticed.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> + intel_ring_emit(ring, MI_LOAD_REGISTER_IMM(1));
> >> >> + intel_ring_emit(ring, MSG_FBC_REND_STATE);
> >> >> + intel_ring_emit(ring, FBC_REND_NUKE);
> >> >> + intel_ring_advance(ring);
> >> >> +
> >> >> + return 0;
> >> >> +}
> >> >> +
> >> >> static int
> >> >> gen7_render_ring_flush(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
> >> >> u32 invalidate_domains, u32 flush_domains)
> >> >> @@ -336,6 +360,9 @@ gen7_render_ring_flush(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
> >> >> intel_ring_emit(ring, 0);
> >> >> intel_ring_advance(ring);
> >> >>
> >> >> + if (flush_domains)
> >> >> + return gen7_ring_fbc_flush(ring);
> >> >> +
> >> >> return 0;
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> @@ -1623,6 +1650,7 @@ gen6_ring_dispatch_execbuffer(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
> >> >> static int blt_ring_flush(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
> >> >> u32 invalidate, u32 flush)
> >> >> {
> >> >> + struct drm_device *dev = ring->dev;
> >> >> uint32_t cmd;
> >> >> int ret;
> >> >>
> >> >> @@ -1645,6 +1673,10 @@ static int blt_ring_flush(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
> >> >> intel_ring_emit(ring, 0);
> >> >> intel_ring_emit(ring, MI_NOOP);
> >> >> intel_ring_advance(ring);
> >> >> +
> >> >> + if (IS_GEN7(dev))
> >> >> + return gen7_ring_fbc_flush(ring);
> >> >
> >> > Should check flush_domains here as well?
> >>
> >> here is flush domain by definition, isn' t it?
> >
> > How so?
>
> this function is the ring->flush. how is it possible to have it out of
> flush domain? or are the names just confusing me?
->flush() takes as parameters invalidate and flush domain bitmasks. You
already check for flush_domains in gen7_render_ring_flush(). If you're
just invalidating, nothing gets flushed to the memory and hence the nuke
procedure is not needed.
> >> >
> >> > So we're now using the same nuke mechanism from the blt ring too.
> >> > Should we then drop the regular blitter tracking things from fbc_enable?
> >>
> >> This is a good question. Since this is a critical patch and it is
> >> working in the way it is I prefer to let it in the way it is and
> >> promisse that I will try to drop old blitter tracking for ivb and hsw
> >> later. If it works I'll send the drop in another patch.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Oh and what about vcs and vecs, should we nuke from those rings as well?
> >> > I guess it would be strange to write to the primary plane's buffer via
> >> > vcs, but I'm assuming vebox could write the same formats that we can
> >> > scan out...
> >>
> >> To be truly honest with you I have no idea about these case. specs
> >> just says to put after every pipe_control following flush
> >> renderings... and blt.
> >
> > IIRC the spec doesn't say anything about blt.
> >
> > Ah, the PM giude tells you to do LRIs w/ blt too. But it actually says
> > that you should do "cache clean" LRIs insted of "nuke" LRIs.
>
> It is just the name, but same address and bit.
It's not the same bit. Nuke is bit 2, cache clean is bit 1.
> from BSPec: " Driver must program a MI_FLUSH_DW followed by a LRI into
> the BCS ring to generate a cache clean message to FBC (LRI to offset
> 0x50380 with data 0x00000002)."
0x2 == (1 << 1)
aka. the cache clean bit, just like the text said.
>
> With this blit in the way it is I' m getting best rendering and power
> saving performance.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> +
> >> >> return 0;
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> 1.8.1.4
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> Intel-gfx mailing list
> >> >> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> >> >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Ville Syrj?l?
> >> > Intel OTC
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Rodrigo Vivi
> >> Blog: http://blog.vivi.eng.br
> >
> > --
> > Ville Syrj?l?
> > Intel OTC
>
>
>
> --
> Rodrigo Vivi
> Blog: http://blog.vivi.eng.br
--
Ville Syrj?l?
Intel OTC
