On Tue, 08 Sep 2015, Clint Taylor <clinton.a.taylor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 09/08/2015 11:05 AM, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> If one disables DDR DVFS in the BIOS, Punit will apparently ignores >> all DDR DVFS request. Currently we assume that DDR DVFS is always >> operational, which leads to errors in dmesg when the DDR DVFS requests >> time out. >> >> Fix the problem by gently prodding Punit during driver load to find out >> whether it will respond to DDR DVFS requests. If the request times out, >> we assume that DDR DVFS has been permanenly disabled in the BIOS and >> no longer perster the Punit about it. >> >> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91629 >> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 ++ >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- >> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h >> index cf1880e..c2af7d8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h >> @@ -1940,6 +1940,8 @@ struct drm_i915_private { >> struct skl_wm_values skl_hw; >> struct vlv_wm_values vlv; >> }; >> + >> + uint8_t max_level; >> } wm; >> >> struct i915_runtime_pm pm; >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c >> index 64bc77e..1f6b5bb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c >> @@ -961,8 +961,6 @@ enum vlv_wm_level { >> VLV_WM_LEVEL_PM2, >> VLV_WM_LEVEL_PM5, >> VLV_WM_LEVEL_DDR_DVFS, >> - CHV_WM_NUM_LEVELS, >> - VLV_WM_NUM_LEVELS = 1, >> }; >> >> /* latency must be in 0.1us units. */ >> @@ -988,9 +986,13 @@ static void vlv_setup_wm_latency(struct drm_device *dev) >> /* all latencies in usec */ >> dev_priv->wm.pri_latency[VLV_WM_LEVEL_PM2] = 3; >> >> + dev_priv->wm.max_level = VLV_WM_LEVEL_PM2; >> + >> if (IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev_priv)) { >> dev_priv->wm.pri_latency[VLV_WM_LEVEL_PM5] = 12; >> dev_priv->wm.pri_latency[VLV_WM_LEVEL_DDR_DVFS] = 33; >> + >> + dev_priv->wm.max_level = VLV_WM_LEVEL_DDR_DVFS; >> } >> } >> >> @@ -1143,10 +1145,7 @@ static void vlv_compute_wm(struct intel_crtc *crtc) >> memset(wm_state, 0, sizeof(*wm_state)); >> >> wm_state->cxsr = crtc->pipe != PIPE_C && crtc->wm.cxsr_allowed; >> - if (IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev)) >> - wm_state->num_levels = CHV_WM_NUM_LEVELS; >> - else >> - wm_state->num_levels = VLV_WM_NUM_LEVELS; >> + wm_state->num_levels = to_i915(dev)->wm.max_level + 1; >> >> wm_state->num_active_planes = 0; >> >> @@ -1226,7 +1225,7 @@ static void vlv_compute_wm(struct intel_crtc *crtc) >> } >> >> /* clear any (partially) filled invalid levels */ >> - for (level = wm_state->num_levels; level < CHV_WM_NUM_LEVELS; level++) { >> + for (level = wm_state->num_levels; level < to_i915(dev)->wm.max_level + 1; level++) { >> memset(&wm_state->wm[level], 0, sizeof(wm_state->wm[level])); >> memset(&wm_state->sr[level], 0, sizeof(wm_state->sr[level])); >> } >> @@ -1330,10 +1329,7 @@ static void vlv_merge_wm(struct drm_device *dev, >> struct intel_crtc *crtc; >> int num_active_crtcs = 0; >> >> - if (IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev)) >> - wm->level = VLV_WM_LEVEL_DDR_DVFS; >> - else >> - wm->level = VLV_WM_LEVEL_PM2; >> + wm->level = to_i915(dev)->wm.max_level; >> wm->cxsr = true; >> >> for_each_intel_crtc(dev, crtc) { >> @@ -4090,9 +4086,29 @@ void vlv_wm_get_hw_state(struct drm_device *dev) >> if (val & DSP_MAXFIFO_PM5_ENABLE) >> wm->level = VLV_WM_LEVEL_PM5; >> >> + /* >> + * If DDR DVFS is disabled in the BIOS, Punit >> + * will never ack the request. So if that happens >> + * assume we don't have to enable/disable DDR DVFS >> + * dynamically. To test that just set the REQ_ACK >> + * bit to poke the Punit, but don't change the >> + * HIGH/LOW bits so that we don't actually change >> + * the current state. >> + */ >> val = vlv_punit_read(dev_priv, PUNIT_REG_DDR_SETUP2); >> - if ((val & FORCE_DDR_HIGH_FREQ) == 0) >> - wm->level = VLV_WM_LEVEL_DDR_DVFS; >> + val |= FORCE_DDR_FREQ_REQ_ACK; >> + vlv_punit_write(dev_priv, PUNIT_REG_DDR_SETUP2, val); >> + >> + if (wait_for((vlv_punit_read(dev_priv, PUNIT_REG_DDR_SETUP2) & >> + FORCE_DDR_FREQ_REQ_ACK) == 0, 3)) { >> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Punit not acking DDR DVFS request, " >> + "assuming DDR DVFS is disabled\n"); >> + dev_priv->wm.max_level = VLV_WM_LEVEL_PM5; >> + } else { >> + val = vlv_punit_read(dev_priv, PUNIT_REG_DDR_SETUP2); >> + if ((val & FORCE_DDR_HIGH_FREQ) == 0) >> + wm->level = VLV_WM_LEVEL_DDR_DVFS; >> + } >> >> mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->rps.hw_lock); >> } >> > > Nice. > > Reviewed-by: Clint Taylor <Clinton.A.Taylor@xxxxxxxxx> > Tested-by: Clint Taylor <Clinton.A.Taylor@xxxxxxxxx> Pushed to drm-intel-next-fixes, thanks for the patch and review. BR, Jani. > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
