Am Montag, den 30.06.2014, 11:09 +0100 schrieb Chris Wilson: > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:02:20PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Tue 2014-06-24 13:27:37, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 02:24:30PM +0200, Thomas Meyer wrote: > > > > Am Dienstag, den 24.06.2014, 12:57 +0100 schrieb Chris Wilson: > > > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 02:06:24PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Thomas Meyer <thomas@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > the i915 driver is still broken in 3.16-rc2. Resume from ram crashes the > > > > > > > X server. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not new to 3.16-rc2; apparently we've had it since v3.15-rc4 > > > > > > [1]. Also related [2]. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris, any fresh ideas? > > > > > > > > > > Nope. The bug is https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76554 > > > > > everything we know and have tried is there. Which is not much more than > > > > > at time of the original incarnation: > > > > > > > > > > commit 50aa253d820ad4577e2231202f2c8fd89f9dc4e6 > > > > > Author: Keith Packard <keithp@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Date: Tue Oct 14 17:20:35 2008 -0700 > > > > > > > > > > i915: Fix up ring initialization to cover G45 oddities > > > > > > > > > > G45 appears quite sensitive to ring initialization register writes, > > > > > sometimes leaving the HEAD register with the START register contents. Check > > > > > to make sure HEAD is reset correctly when START is written, and fix it up, > > > > > screaming loudly. > > > > > -Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > so why not revert 78f2975eec9faff353a6194e854d3d39907bab68 (drm/i915: > > > > Move all ring resets before setting the HWS page) ? > > > > > > Because that patch was in response to a boot time regression. > > > > It seems we are in a fairly ugly "fix one board, it breaks another" iterations, right? > > > > (BTW, if you apply patch to fix this bug, could you Cc me? I have strange feeling > > that it will break my setup... Actually, it probably makes sense to Cc all the people > > who reported problems with ring initialization... > > > > What patch caused the boot time regression you are talking about? We need to get > > list of commits involved in this, and revert the original one... > > commit 9991ae787a0c87fe7c783b4b6f4754c3cdbb6213 > Author: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Apr 2 16:36:07 2014 +0100 > > drm/i915: Move all ring resets before setting the HWS page > > In commit a51435a3137ad8ae75c288c39bd2d8b2696bae8f > Author: Naresh Kumar Kachhi <naresh.kumar.kachhi@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Mar 12 16:39:40 2014 +0530 > > drm/i915: disable rings before HW status page setup > > we reordered stopping the rings to do so before we set the HWS register. > However, there is an extra workaround for g45 to reset the rings twice, > and for consistency we should apply that workaround before setting the > HWS to be sure that the rings are truly stopped. > > Cc: Naresh Kumar Kachhi <naresh.kumar.kachhi@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > > commit a51435a3137ad8ae75c288c39bd2d8b2696bae8f > Author: Naresh Kumar Kachhi <naresh.kumar.kachhi@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Mar 12 16:39:40 2014 +0530 > > drm/i915: disable rings before HW status page setup > > Rings should be idle before issuing sync_flush > (in intel_ring_setup_status_page). This patch moves the ring > disabling before doing the HW status page setup. > > Signed-off-by: Naresh Kumar Kachhi <naresh.kumar.kachhi@xxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Hi, this patch on top of v3.16-rc3-62-gd92a333 makes the resume from ram regression go away on my machine: diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c index 279488a..b896ac8 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c @@ -459,22 +459,25 @@ static bool stop_ring(struct intel_engine_cs *ring) { struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(ring->dev); - if (!IS_GEN2(ring->dev)) { - I915_WRITE_MODE(ring, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(STOP_RING)); - if (wait_for_atomic((I915_READ_MODE(ring) & MODE_IDLE) != 0, 1000)) { - DRM_ERROR("%s :timed out trying to stop ring\n", ring->name); - return false; - } - } - +// if (!IS_GEN2(ring->dev)) { +// I915_WRITE_MODE(ring, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(STOP_RING)); +// if (wait_for_atomic((I915_READ_MODE(ring) & MODE_IDLE) != 0, 1000)) { +// DRM_ERROR("%s :timed out trying to stop ring1\n", ring->name); +// return false; +// } +// } + + /* Stop the ring if it's running. */ I915_WRITE_CTL(ring, 0); I915_WRITE_HEAD(ring, 0); ring->write_tail(ring, 0); + if (wait_for_atomic((I915_READ_MODE(ring) & MODE_IDLE) != 0, 1000)) + DRM_ERROR("%s :timed out trying to stop ring2\n", ring->name); - if (!IS_GEN2(ring->dev)) { - (void)I915_READ_CTL(ring); - I915_WRITE_MODE(ring, _MASKED_BIT_DISABLE(STOP_RING)); - } +// if (!IS_GEN2(ring->dev)) { +// (void)I915_READ_CTL(ring); +// I915_WRITE_MODE(ring, _MASKED_BIT_DISABLE(STOP_RING)); +// } return (I915_READ_HEAD(ring) & HEAD_ADDR) == 0; } Chris, any ideas why explicitly stopping the ring before reset, results in this kind of misbehaviour on my machine on resume from ram? with kind regards thomas _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
