On Fri, 09 Jun 2023 15:02:52 -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
>
Hi Vinay,
> We were skipping when min_softlimit was equal to RPn. We need to apply
> it rergardless as efficient frequency will push the SLPC min to RPe.
> This will break scenarios where user sets a min softlimit < RPe before
> reset and then performs a GT reset.
>
> Fixes: 95ccf312a1e4 ("drm/i915/guc/slpc: Allow SLPC to use efficient frequency")
>
> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> index 01b75529311c..ee9f83af7cf6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> @@ -606,7 +606,7 @@ static int slpc_set_softlimits(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc)
> if (unlikely(ret))
> return ret;
> slpc_to_gt(slpc)->defaults.min_freq = slpc->min_freq_softlimit;
> - } else if (slpc->min_freq_softlimit != slpc->min_freq) {
> + } else {
> return intel_guc_slpc_set_min_freq(slpc,
> slpc->min_freq_softlimit);
IMO the current code is unnecessarily complicated and confusing and similar
changes (with a little tweaking) should be made for max_freq too. But at
least this is a step in the right direction so:
Reviewed-by: Ashutosh Dixit <ashutosh.dixit@xxxxxxxxx>
> }
> --
> 2.38.1
>
