linux_dsm_epyc7002/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_stolen.c

775 lines
20 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*
* Copyright © 2008-2012 Intel Corporation
*
* Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
* copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"),
* to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation
* the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense,
* and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
* Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
*
* The above copyright notice and this permission notice (including the next
* paragraph) shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the
* Software.
*
* THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
* IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
* FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL
* THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
* LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
* FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS
* IN THE SOFTWARE.
*
* Authors:
* Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
* Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
*
*/
#include <drm/drmP.h>
#include <drm/i915_drm.h>
#include "i915_drv.h"
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
#define KB(x) ((x) * 1024)
#define MB(x) (KB(x) * 1024)
/*
* The BIOS typically reserves some of the system's memory for the exclusive
* use of the integrated graphics. This memory is no longer available for
* use by the OS and so the user finds that his system has less memory
* available than he put in. We refer to this memory as stolen.
*
* The BIOS will allocate its framebuffer from the stolen memory. Our
* goal is try to reuse that object for our own fbcon which must always
* be available for panics. Anything else we can reuse the stolen memory
* for is a boon.
*/
int i915_gem_stolen_insert_node_in_range(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
struct drm_mm_node *node, u64 size,
unsigned alignment, u64 start, u64 end)
{
int ret;
if (!drm_mm_initialized(&dev_priv->mm.stolen))
return -ENODEV;
mutex_lock(&dev_priv->mm.stolen_lock);
drm: Improve drm_mm search (and fix topdown allocation) with rbtrees The drm_mm range manager claimed to support top-down insertion, but it was neither searching for the top-most hole that could fit the allocation request nor fitting the request to the hole correctly. In order to search the range efficiently, we create a secondary index for the holes using either their size or their address. This index allows us to find the smallest hole or the hole at the bottom or top of the range efficiently, whilst keeping the hole stack to rapidly service evictions. v2: Search for holes both high and low. Rename flags to mode. v3: Discover rb_entry_safe() and use it! v4: Kerneldoc for enum drm_mm_insert_mode. Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com> Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie> Cc: Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com> Cc: Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org> Cc: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> Cc: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com> Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Cc: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com> Cc: Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> Cc: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com> Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com> Reviewed-by: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> # vmwgfx Reviewed-by: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> #etnaviv Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20170202210438.28702-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2017-02-03 04:04:38 +07:00
ret = drm_mm_insert_node_in_range(&dev_priv->mm.stolen, node,
size, alignment, 0,
start, end, DRM_MM_INSERT_BEST);
mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->mm.stolen_lock);
return ret;
}
int i915_gem_stolen_insert_node(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
struct drm_mm_node *node, u64 size,
unsigned alignment)
{
return i915_gem_stolen_insert_node_in_range(dev_priv, node, size,
2016-12-15 20:23:55 +07:00
alignment, 0, U64_MAX);
}
void i915_gem_stolen_remove_node(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
struct drm_mm_node *node)
{
mutex_lock(&dev_priv->mm.stolen_lock);
drm_mm_remove_node(node);
mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->mm.stolen_lock);
}
static dma_addr_t i915_stolen_to_dma(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
{
struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_priv->drm.pdev;
struct i915_ggtt *ggtt = &dev_priv->ggtt;
struct resource *r;
dma_addr_t base;
/* Almost universally we can find the Graphics Base of Stolen Memory
* at register BSM (0x5c) in the igfx configuration space. On a few
* (desktop) machines this is also mirrored in the bridge device at
* different locations, or in the MCHBAR.
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
*
* On 865 we just check the TOUD register.
*
* On 830/845/85x the stolen memory base isn't available in any
* register. We need to calculate it as TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size.
*
*/
base = 0;
if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 3) {
u32 bsm;
pci_read_config_dword(pdev, INTEL_BSM, &bsm);
base = bsm & INTEL_BSM_MASK;
} else if (IS_I865G(dev_priv)) {
drm/i915: Account for TSEG size when determining 865G stolen base Looks like the TSEG lives just above TOUD, stolen comes after TSEG. The spec seems somewhat self-contradictory in places, in the ESMRAMC register desctription it says: TSEG Size: 10=(TOUD + 512 KB) to TOUD 11 =(TOUD + 1 MB) to TOUD so that agrees with TSEG being at TOUD. But the example given elsehwere in the spec says: TOUD equals 62.5 MB = 03E7FFFFh TSEG selected as 512 KB in size, Graphics local memory selected as 1 MB in size General System RAM available in system = 62.5 MB General system RAM range00000000h to 03E7FFFFh TSEG address range03F80000h to 03FFFFFFh TSEG pre-allocated from03F80000h to 03FFFFFFh Graphics local memory pre-allocated from03E80000h to 03F7FFFFh so here we have TSEG above stolen. Real world evidence agrees with the TOUD->TSEG->stolen order however, so let's fix up the code to account for the TSEG size. Cc: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: x86@kernel.org Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 0ad98c74e093 ("drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2") Fixes: a4dff76924fe ("x86/gpu: Add Intel graphics stolen memory quirk for gen2 platforms") Reported-by: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Tested-by: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96473 Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1470653919-27251-1-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com Link: http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/25251405.pdf Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
2016-08-08 17:58:39 +07:00
u32 tseg_size = 0;
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
u16 toud = 0;
drm/i915: Account for TSEG size when determining 865G stolen base Looks like the TSEG lives just above TOUD, stolen comes after TSEG. The spec seems somewhat self-contradictory in places, in the ESMRAMC register desctription it says: TSEG Size: 10=(TOUD + 512 KB) to TOUD 11 =(TOUD + 1 MB) to TOUD so that agrees with TSEG being at TOUD. But the example given elsehwere in the spec says: TOUD equals 62.5 MB = 03E7FFFFh TSEG selected as 512 KB in size, Graphics local memory selected as 1 MB in size General System RAM available in system = 62.5 MB General system RAM range00000000h to 03E7FFFFh TSEG address range03F80000h to 03FFFFFFh TSEG pre-allocated from03F80000h to 03FFFFFFh Graphics local memory pre-allocated from03E80000h to 03F7FFFFh so here we have TSEG above stolen. Real world evidence agrees with the TOUD->TSEG->stolen order however, so let's fix up the code to account for the TSEG size. Cc: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: x86@kernel.org Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 0ad98c74e093 ("drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2") Fixes: a4dff76924fe ("x86/gpu: Add Intel graphics stolen memory quirk for gen2 platforms") Reported-by: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Tested-by: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96473 Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1470653919-27251-1-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com Link: http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/25251405.pdf Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
2016-08-08 17:58:39 +07:00
u8 tmp;
pci_bus_read_config_byte(pdev->bus, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0),
drm/i915: Account for TSEG size when determining 865G stolen base Looks like the TSEG lives just above TOUD, stolen comes after TSEG. The spec seems somewhat self-contradictory in places, in the ESMRAMC register desctription it says: TSEG Size: 10=(TOUD + 512 KB) to TOUD 11 =(TOUD + 1 MB) to TOUD so that agrees with TSEG being at TOUD. But the example given elsehwere in the spec says: TOUD equals 62.5 MB = 03E7FFFFh TSEG selected as 512 KB in size, Graphics local memory selected as 1 MB in size General System RAM available in system = 62.5 MB General system RAM range00000000h to 03E7FFFFh TSEG address range03F80000h to 03FFFFFFh TSEG pre-allocated from03F80000h to 03FFFFFFh Graphics local memory pre-allocated from03E80000h to 03F7FFFFh so here we have TSEG above stolen. Real world evidence agrees with the TOUD->TSEG->stolen order however, so let's fix up the code to account for the TSEG size. Cc: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: x86@kernel.org Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 0ad98c74e093 ("drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2") Fixes: a4dff76924fe ("x86/gpu: Add Intel graphics stolen memory quirk for gen2 platforms") Reported-by: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Tested-by: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96473 Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1470653919-27251-1-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com Link: http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/25251405.pdf Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
2016-08-08 17:58:39 +07:00
I845_ESMRAMC, &tmp);
if (tmp & TSEG_ENABLE) {
switch (tmp & I845_TSEG_SIZE_MASK) {
case I845_TSEG_SIZE_512K:
tseg_size = KB(512);
break;
case I845_TSEG_SIZE_1M:
tseg_size = MB(1);
break;
}
}
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
pci_bus_read_config_word(pdev->bus, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0),
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
I865_TOUD, &toud);
drm/i915: Account for TSEG size when determining 865G stolen base Looks like the TSEG lives just above TOUD, stolen comes after TSEG. The spec seems somewhat self-contradictory in places, in the ESMRAMC register desctription it says: TSEG Size: 10=(TOUD + 512 KB) to TOUD 11 =(TOUD + 1 MB) to TOUD so that agrees with TSEG being at TOUD. But the example given elsehwere in the spec says: TOUD equals 62.5 MB = 03E7FFFFh TSEG selected as 512 KB in size, Graphics local memory selected as 1 MB in size General System RAM available in system = 62.5 MB General system RAM range00000000h to 03E7FFFFh TSEG address range03F80000h to 03FFFFFFh TSEG pre-allocated from03F80000h to 03FFFFFFh Graphics local memory pre-allocated from03E80000h to 03F7FFFFh so here we have TSEG above stolen. Real world evidence agrees with the TOUD->TSEG->stolen order however, so let's fix up the code to account for the TSEG size. Cc: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: x86@kernel.org Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 0ad98c74e093 ("drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2") Fixes: a4dff76924fe ("x86/gpu: Add Intel graphics stolen memory quirk for gen2 platforms") Reported-by: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Tested-by: Taketo Kabe <fdporg@vega.pgw.jp> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96473 Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1470653919-27251-1-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com Link: http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/25251405.pdf Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
2016-08-08 17:58:39 +07:00
base = (toud << 16) + tseg_size;
} else if (IS_I85X(dev_priv)) {
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
u32 tseg_size = 0;
u32 tom;
u8 tmp;
pci_bus_read_config_byte(pdev->bus, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0),
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
I85X_ESMRAMC, &tmp);
if (tmp & TSEG_ENABLE)
tseg_size = MB(1);
pci_bus_read_config_byte(pdev->bus, PCI_DEVFN(0, 1),
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
I85X_DRB3, &tmp);
tom = tmp * MB(32);
base = tom - tseg_size - ggtt->stolen_size;
} else if (IS_I845G(dev_priv)) {
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
u32 tseg_size = 0;
u32 tom;
u8 tmp;
pci_bus_read_config_byte(pdev->bus, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0),
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
I845_ESMRAMC, &tmp);
if (tmp & TSEG_ENABLE) {
switch (tmp & I845_TSEG_SIZE_MASK) {
case I845_TSEG_SIZE_512K:
tseg_size = KB(512);
break;
case I845_TSEG_SIZE_1M:
tseg_size = MB(1);
break;
}
}
pci_bus_read_config_byte(pdev->bus, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0),
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
I830_DRB3, &tmp);
tom = tmp * MB(32);
base = tom - tseg_size - ggtt->stolen_size;
} else if (IS_I830(dev_priv)) {
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
u32 tseg_size = 0;
u32 tom;
u8 tmp;
pci_bus_read_config_byte(pdev->bus, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0),
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
I830_ESMRAMC, &tmp);
if (tmp & TSEG_ENABLE) {
if (tmp & I830_TSEG_SIZE_1M)
tseg_size = MB(1);
else
tseg_size = KB(512);
}
pci_bus_read_config_byte(pdev->bus, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0),
drm/i915: Determine the stolen memory base address on gen2 There isn't an explicit stolen memory base register on gen2. Some old comment in the i915 code suggests we should get it via max_low_pfn_mapped, but that's clearly a bad idea on my MGM. The e820 map in said machine looks like this: [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000000009f7ff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000000009f800-0x000000000009ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000ce000-0x00000000000cffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000000dc000-0x00000000000fffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000000100000-0x000000001f6effff] usable [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f0000-0x000000001f6f7fff] ACPI data [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f6f8000-0x000000001f6fffff] ACPI NVS [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x000000001f700000-0x000000001fffffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fec10000-0x00000000fec1ffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000ffb00000-0x00000000ffbfffff] reserved [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x00000000fff00000-0x00000000ffffffff] reserved That makes max_low_pfn_mapped = 1f6f0000, so assuming our stolen memory would start there would place it on top of some ACPI memory regions. So not a good idea as already stated. The 9MB region after the ACPI regions at 0x1f700000 however looks promising given that the macine reports the stolen memory size to be 8MB. Looking at the PGTBL_CTL register, the GTT entries are at offset 0x1fee00000, and given that the GTT entries occupy 128KB, it looks like the stolen memory could start at 0x1f700000 and the GTT entries would occupy the last 128KB of the stolen memory. After some more digging through chipset documentation, I've determined the BIOS first allocates space for something called TSEG (something to do with SMM) from the top of memory, and then it allocates the graphics stolen memory below that. Accordind to the chipset documentation TSEG has a fixed size of 1MB on 855. So that explains the top 1MB in the e820 region. And it also confirms that the GTT entries are in fact at the end of the the stolen memory region. Derive the stolen memory base address on gen2 the same as the BIOS does (TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size). There are a few differences between the registers on various gen2 chipsets, so a few different codepaths are required. 865G is again bit more special since it seems to support enough memory to hit 4GB address space issues. This means the PCI allocations will also affect the location of the stolen memory. Fortunately there appears to be the TOUD register which may give us the correct answer directly. But the chipset docs are a bit unclear, so I'm not 100% sure that the graphics stolen memory is always the last thing the BIOS steals. Someone would need to verify it on a real system. I tested this on the my 830 and 855 machines, and so far everything looks peachy. v2: Rewrite to use the TOM-TSEG_SIZE-stolen_size and TOUD methods v3: Fix TSEG size for 830 v4: Add missing 'else' (Chris) Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-10-08 16:08:20 +07:00
I830_DRB3, &tmp);
tom = tmp * MB(32);
base = tom - tseg_size - ggtt->stolen_size;
}
if (base == 0 || add_overflows(base, ggtt->stolen_size))
return 0;
/* make sure we don't clobber the GTT if it's within stolen memory */
if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) <= 4 &&
!IS_G33(dev_priv) && !IS_PINEVIEW(dev_priv) && !IS_G4X(dev_priv)) {
struct {
dma_addr_t start, end;
} stolen[2] = {
{ .start = base, .end = base + ggtt->stolen_size, },
{ .start = base, .end = base + ggtt->stolen_size, },
};
u64 ggtt_start, ggtt_end;
ggtt_start = I915_READ(PGTBL_CTL);
if (IS_GEN4(dev_priv))
ggtt_start = (ggtt_start & PGTBL_ADDRESS_LO_MASK) |
(ggtt_start & PGTBL_ADDRESS_HI_MASK) << 28;
else
ggtt_start &= PGTBL_ADDRESS_LO_MASK;
ggtt_end = ggtt_start + ggtt_total_entries(ggtt) * 4;
if (ggtt_start >= stolen[0].start && ggtt_start < stolen[0].end)
stolen[0].end = ggtt_start;
if (ggtt_end > stolen[1].start && ggtt_end <= stolen[1].end)
stolen[1].start = ggtt_end;
/* pick the larger of the two chunks */
if (stolen[0].end - stolen[0].start >
stolen[1].end - stolen[1].start) {
base = stolen[0].start;
ggtt->stolen_size = stolen[0].end - stolen[0].start;
} else {
base = stolen[1].start;
ggtt->stolen_size = stolen[1].end - stolen[1].start;
}
if (stolen[0].start != stolen[1].start ||
stolen[0].end != stolen[1].end) {
dma_addr_t end = base + ggtt->stolen_size - 1;
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("GTT within stolen memory at 0x%llx-0x%llx\n",
(unsigned long long)ggtt_start,
(unsigned long long)ggtt_end - 1);
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Stolen memory adjusted to %pad - %pad\n",
&base, &end);
}
}
/* Verify that nothing else uses this physical address. Stolen
* memory should be reserved by the BIOS and hidden from the
* kernel. So if the region is already marked as busy, something
* is seriously wrong.
*/
r = devm_request_mem_region(dev_priv->drm.dev, base, ggtt->stolen_size,
"Graphics Stolen Memory");
if (r == NULL) {
/*
* One more attempt but this time requesting region from
* base + 1, as we have seen that this resolves the region
* conflict with the PCI Bus.
* This is a BIOS w/a: Some BIOS wrap stolen in the root
* PCI bus, but have an off-by-one error. Hence retry the
* reservation starting from 1 instead of 0.
* There's also BIOS with off-by-one on the other end.
*/
r = devm_request_mem_region(dev_priv->drm.dev, base + 1,
ggtt->stolen_size - 2,
"Graphics Stolen Memory");
/*
* GEN3 firmware likes to smash pci bridges into the stolen
* range. Apparently this works.
*/
if (r == NULL && !IS_GEN3(dev_priv)) {
dma_addr_t end = base + ggtt->stolen_size;
DRM_ERROR("conflict detected with stolen region: [%pad - %pad]\n",
&base, &end);
base = 0;
}
}
return base;
}
void i915_gem_cleanup_stolen(struct drm_device *dev)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev);
if (!drm_mm_initialized(&dev_priv->mm.stolen))
return;
drm_mm_takedown(&dev_priv->mm.stolen);
}
static void g4x_get_stolen_reserved(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
dma_addr_t *base, u32 *size)
{
struct i915_ggtt *ggtt = &dev_priv->ggtt;
uint32_t reg_val = I915_READ(IS_GM45(dev_priv) ?
CTG_STOLEN_RESERVED :
ELK_STOLEN_RESERVED);
dma_addr_t stolen_top = dev_priv->mm.stolen_base + ggtt->stolen_size;
if ((reg_val & G4X_STOLEN_RESERVED_ENABLE) == 0) {
*base = 0;
*size = 0;
return;
}
/*
* Whether ILK really reuses the ELK register for this is unclear.
* Let's see if we catch anyone with this supposedly enabled on ILK.
*/
WARN(IS_GEN5(dev_priv), "ILK stolen reserved found? 0x%08x\n", reg_val);
*base = (reg_val & G4X_STOLEN_RESERVED_ADDR2_MASK) << 16;
WARN_ON((reg_val & G4X_STOLEN_RESERVED_ADDR1_MASK) < *base);
/* On these platforms, the register doesn't have a size field, so the
* size is the distance between the base and the top of the stolen
* memory. We also have the genuine case where base is zero and there's
* nothing reserved. */
if (*base == 0)
*size = 0;
else
*size = stolen_top - *base;
}
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
static void gen6_get_stolen_reserved(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
dma_addr_t *base, u32 *size)
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
{
uint32_t reg_val = I915_READ(GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED);
if ((reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_ENABLE) == 0) {
*base = 0;
*size = 0;
return;
}
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
*base = reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_ADDR_MASK;
switch (reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_SIZE_MASK) {
case GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_1M:
*size = 1024 * 1024;
break;
case GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_512K:
*size = 512 * 1024;
break;
case GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_256K:
*size = 256 * 1024;
break;
case GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_128K:
*size = 128 * 1024;
break;
default:
*size = 1024 * 1024;
MISSING_CASE(reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_SIZE_MASK);
}
}
static void gen7_get_stolen_reserved(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
dma_addr_t *base, u32 *size)
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
{
uint32_t reg_val = I915_READ(GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED);
if ((reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_ENABLE) == 0) {
*base = 0;
*size = 0;
return;
}
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
*base = reg_val & GEN7_STOLEN_RESERVED_ADDR_MASK;
switch (reg_val & GEN7_STOLEN_RESERVED_SIZE_MASK) {
case GEN7_STOLEN_RESERVED_1M:
*size = 1024 * 1024;
break;
case GEN7_STOLEN_RESERVED_256K:
*size = 256 * 1024;
break;
default:
*size = 1024 * 1024;
MISSING_CASE(reg_val & GEN7_STOLEN_RESERVED_SIZE_MASK);
}
}
static void chv_get_stolen_reserved(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
dma_addr_t *base, u32 *size)
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
{
uint32_t reg_val = I915_READ(GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED);
if ((reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_ENABLE) == 0) {
*base = 0;
*size = 0;
return;
}
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
*base = reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_ADDR_MASK;
switch (reg_val & GEN8_STOLEN_RESERVED_SIZE_MASK) {
case GEN8_STOLEN_RESERVED_1M:
*size = 1024 * 1024;
break;
case GEN8_STOLEN_RESERVED_2M:
*size = 2 * 1024 * 1024;
break;
case GEN8_STOLEN_RESERVED_4M:
*size = 4 * 1024 * 1024;
break;
case GEN8_STOLEN_RESERVED_8M:
*size = 8 * 1024 * 1024;
break;
default:
*size = 8 * 1024 * 1024;
MISSING_CASE(reg_val & GEN8_STOLEN_RESERVED_SIZE_MASK);
}
}
static void bdw_get_stolen_reserved(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
dma_addr_t *base, u32 *size)
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
{
struct i915_ggtt *ggtt = &dev_priv->ggtt;
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
uint32_t reg_val = I915_READ(GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED);
dma_addr_t stolen_top;
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
if ((reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_ENABLE) == 0) {
*base = 0;
*size = 0;
return;
}
stolen_top = dev_priv->mm.stolen_base + ggtt->stolen_size;
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
*base = reg_val & GEN6_STOLEN_RESERVED_ADDR_MASK;
/* On these platforms, the register doesn't have a size field, so the
* size is the distance between the base and the top of the stolen
* memory. We also have the genuine case where base is zero and there's
* nothing reserved. */
if (*base == 0)
*size = 0;
else
*size = stolen_top - *base;
}
int i915_gem_init_stolen(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
{
struct i915_ggtt *ggtt = &dev_priv->ggtt;
dma_addr_t reserved_base, stolen_top;
u32 reserved_total, reserved_size;
u32 stolen_usable_start;
mutex_init(&dev_priv->mm.stolen_lock);
if (intel_vgpu_active(dev_priv)) {
DRM_INFO("iGVT-g active, disabling use of stolen memory\n");
return 0;
}
if (intel_vtd_active() && INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 8) {
DRM_INFO("DMAR active, disabling use of stolen memory\n");
return 0;
}
if (ggtt->stolen_size == 0)
return 0;
dev_priv->mm.stolen_base = i915_stolen_to_dma(dev_priv);
if (dev_priv->mm.stolen_base == 0)
return 0;
stolen_top = dev_priv->mm.stolen_base + ggtt->stolen_size;
reserved_base = 0;
reserved_size = 0;
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
switch (INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->gen) {
case 2:
case 3:
break;
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
case 4:
if (!IS_G4X(dev_priv))
break;
/* fall through */
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
case 5:
g4x_get_stolen_reserved(dev_priv,
&reserved_base, &reserved_size);
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
break;
case 6:
gen6_get_stolen_reserved(dev_priv,
&reserved_base, &reserved_size);
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
break;
case 7:
gen7_get_stolen_reserved(dev_priv,
&reserved_base, &reserved_size);
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
break;
default:
if (IS_LP(dev_priv))
chv_get_stolen_reserved(dev_priv,
&reserved_base, &reserved_size);
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
else
bdw_get_stolen_reserved(dev_priv,
&reserved_base, &reserved_size);
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
break;
}
/* It is possible for the reserved base to be zero, but the register
* field for size doesn't have a zero option. */
if (reserved_base == 0) {
reserved_size = 0;
reserved_base = stolen_top;
}
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
if (reserved_base < dev_priv->mm.stolen_base ||
reserved_base + reserved_size > stolen_top) {
dma_addr_t reserved_top = reserved_base + reserved_size;
DRM_ERROR("Stolen reserved area [%pad - %pad] outside stolen memory [%pad - %pad]\n",
&reserved_base, &reserved_top,
&dev_priv->mm.stolen_base, &stolen_top);
return 0;
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
}
ggtt->stolen_reserved_base = reserved_base;
ggtt->stolen_reserved_size = reserved_size;
drm/i915/bxt: Check BIOS RC6 setup before enabling RC6 RC6 setup is shared between BIOS and Driver. BIOS sets up subset of RC6 setup registers. If those are not setup Driver should not enable RC6. For implementing this, driver can check RC_CTRL0 and RC_CTRL1 values to know if BIOS has enabled HW/SW RC6. This will also enable user to control RC6 using BIOS settings alone. RC6 related instability can be avoided by disabling via BIOS settings till driver fixes it. v2: Had placed logic in gen8 function by mistake. Fixed it. Ensuring RPM is not enabled in case BIOS disabled RC6. v3: Need to disable RPM if RC6 is disabled due to BIOS settings. (Daniel) Runtime PM enabling happens before gen9_enable_rc6. Moved the updation of enable_rc6 parameter in intel_uncore_sanitize. v4: Added elaborate check for BIOS RC6 setup. Prepared check_pctx for bxt. (Imre) v5: Caching reserved stolen base and size in the driver private data. Reorganized RC6 setup check. Moved from gen9_enable_rc6 to intel_uncore_sanitize. (Imre) v6: Rebasing on the patch submitted by Imre that moves gem_init_stolen earlier in the load. v7: Removed PWRCTX_MAXCNT_VCSUNIT1 check as it applies to SKL. (Imre) v8: Fixed formatting and checkpatch issues. Fixed functional issue where RC6 ctx size check was missing. (Imre) Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1454697809-22113-1-git-send-email-sagar.a.kamble@intel.com
2016-02-06 01:43:29 +07:00
drm/i915: fix stolen bios_reserved checks I started digging this when I noticed that the BDW code was just reserving 1mb by coincidence since it was reading reserved fields. Then I noticed we didn't have any values set for SNB and earlier, and that the HSW sizes were wrong. After that, I noticed that the reserved area has a specific start, and may not exactly end where the stolen memory ends. I also noticed the base pointer can be zero. So I decided to just write a single patch fixing everything instead of 20 patches that would be much harder to review. This patch may solve random stolen memory corruption/problems on almost all platforms. Notice that since this is always dealing with the top of the stolen memory, the problems are not so easy to reproduce - especially since FBC is still disabled by default. One of the major differences of this patch is that we now look at both the size and base address. By only looking at the size we were assuming that the reserved area was always at the very top of stolen, which is not always true. After we merge the patch series that allows user space to allocate stolen memory we'll be able to write IGT tests that maybe catch the bugs fixed by this patch. v2: - s/BIOS reserved/stolen reserved/g (Chris) - Don't DRM_ERROR if we can't do anything about it (Chris) - Improve debug messages (Chris). - Use the gen7 version instead of gen6 on HSW. Tom found some documentation problems, so I think with gen7 we're on the safer side (Tom). Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2015-08-11 00:57:32 +07:00
/* It is possible for the reserved area to end before the end of stolen
* memory, so just consider the start. */
reserved_total = stolen_top - reserved_base;
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Memory reserved for graphics device: %uK, usable: %uK\n",
ggtt->stolen_size >> 10,
(ggtt->stolen_size - reserved_total) >> 10);
2016-12-15 20:23:55 +07:00
stolen_usable_start = 0;
/* WaSkipStolenMemoryFirstPage:bdw+ */
if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 8)
stolen_usable_start = 4096;
ggtt->stolen_usable_size =
ggtt->stolen_size - reserved_total - stolen_usable_start;
2016-12-15 20:23:55 +07:00
/* Basic memrange allocator for stolen space. */
drm_mm_init(&dev_priv->mm.stolen, stolen_usable_start,
ggtt->stolen_usable_size);
return 0;
}
static struct sg_table *
i915_pages_create_for_stolen(struct drm_device *dev,
u32 offset, u32 size)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev);
struct sg_table *st;
struct scatterlist *sg;
GEM_BUG_ON(range_overflows(offset, size, dev_priv->ggtt.stolen_size));
/* We hide that we have no struct page backing our stolen object
* by wrapping the contiguous physical allocation with a fake
* dma mapping in a single scatterlist.
*/
st = kmalloc(sizeof(*st), GFP_KERNEL);
if (st == NULL)
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
if (sg_alloc_table(st, 1, GFP_KERNEL)) {
kfree(st);
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
}
sg = st->sgl;
sg->offset = 0;
sg->length = size;
sg_dma_address(sg) = (dma_addr_t)dev_priv->mm.stolen_base + offset;
sg_dma_len(sg) = size;
return st;
}
static int i915_gem_object_get_pages_stolen(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
{
struct sg_table *pages =
i915_pages_create_for_stolen(obj->base.dev,
obj->stolen->start,
obj->stolen->size);
if (IS_ERR(pages))
return PTR_ERR(pages);
__i915_gem_object_set_pages(obj, pages, obj->stolen->size);
return 0;
}
static void i915_gem_object_put_pages_stolen(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
struct sg_table *pages)
{
/* Should only be called from i915_gem_object_release_stolen() */
sg_free_table(pages);
kfree(pages);
}
static void
i915_gem_object_release_stolen(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(obj->base.dev);
struct drm_mm_node *stolen = fetch_and_zero(&obj->stolen);
GEM_BUG_ON(!stolen);
__i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj);
i915_gem_stolen_remove_node(dev_priv, stolen);
kfree(stolen);
}
static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_object_stolen_ops = {
.get_pages = i915_gem_object_get_pages_stolen,
.put_pages = i915_gem_object_put_pages_stolen,
.release = i915_gem_object_release_stolen,
};
static struct drm_i915_gem_object *
_i915_gem_object_create_stolen(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
struct drm_mm_node *stolen)
{
struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj;
drm/i915: Split obj->cache_coherent to track r/w Another month, another story in the cache coherency saga. This time, we come to the realisation that i915_gem_object_is_coherent() has been reporting whether we can read from the target without requiring a cache invalidate; but we were using it in places for testing whether we could write into the object without requiring a cache flush. So split the tracking into two, one to decide before reads, one after writes. See commit e27ab73d17ef ("drm/i915: Mark CPU cache as dirty on every transition for CPU writes") for the previous entry in this saga. v2: Be verbose v3: Remove unused function (i915_gem_object_is_coherent) v4: Fix inverted coherency check prior to execbuf (from v2) v5: Add comment for nasty code where we are optimising on gcc's behalf. Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101109 Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101555 Testcase: igt/kms_mmap_write_crc Testcase: igt/kms_pwrite_crc Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> Cc: Dongwon Kim <dongwon.kim@intel.com> Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Tested-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20170811111116.10373-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
2017-08-11 18:11:16 +07:00
unsigned int cache_level;
obj = i915_gem_object_alloc(dev_priv);
if (obj == NULL)
return NULL;
drm_gem_private_object_init(&dev_priv->drm, &obj->base, stolen->size);
i915_gem_object_init(obj, &i915_gem_object_stolen_ops);
obj->stolen = stolen;
obj->base.read_domains = I915_GEM_DOMAIN_CPU | I915_GEM_DOMAIN_GTT;
drm/i915: Split obj->cache_coherent to track r/w Another month, another story in the cache coherency saga. This time, we come to the realisation that i915_gem_object_is_coherent() has been reporting whether we can read from the target without requiring a cache invalidate; but we were using it in places for testing whether we could write into the object without requiring a cache flush. So split the tracking into two, one to decide before reads, one after writes. See commit e27ab73d17ef ("drm/i915: Mark CPU cache as dirty on every transition for CPU writes") for the previous entry in this saga. v2: Be verbose v3: Remove unused function (i915_gem_object_is_coherent) v4: Fix inverted coherency check prior to execbuf (from v2) v5: Add comment for nasty code where we are optimising on gcc's behalf. Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101109 Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101555 Testcase: igt/kms_mmap_write_crc Testcase: igt/kms_pwrite_crc Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> Cc: Dongwon Kim <dongwon.kim@intel.com> Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Tested-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20170811111116.10373-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
2017-08-11 18:11:16 +07:00
cache_level = HAS_LLC(dev_priv) ? I915_CACHE_LLC : I915_CACHE_NONE;
i915_gem_object_set_cache_coherency(obj, cache_level);
if (i915_gem_object_pin_pages(obj))
goto cleanup;
return obj;
cleanup:
i915_gem_object_free(obj);
return NULL;
}
struct drm_i915_gem_object *
i915_gem_object_create_stolen(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, u32 size)
{
struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj;
struct drm_mm_node *stolen;
int ret;
if (!drm_mm_initialized(&dev_priv->mm.stolen))
return NULL;
if (size == 0)
return NULL;
stolen = kzalloc(sizeof(*stolen), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!stolen)
return NULL;
ret = i915_gem_stolen_insert_node(dev_priv, stolen, size, 4096);
if (ret) {
kfree(stolen);
return NULL;
}
obj = _i915_gem_object_create_stolen(dev_priv, stolen);
if (obj)
return obj;
i915_gem_stolen_remove_node(dev_priv, stolen);
kfree(stolen);
return NULL;
}
struct drm_i915_gem_object *
i915_gem_object_create_stolen_for_preallocated(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
u32 stolen_offset,
u32 gtt_offset,
u32 size)
{
struct i915_ggtt *ggtt = &dev_priv->ggtt;
struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj;
struct drm_mm_node *stolen;
struct i915_vma *vma;
int ret;
if (!drm_mm_initialized(&dev_priv->mm.stolen))
return NULL;
lockdep_assert_held(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("creating preallocated stolen object: stolen_offset=%x, gtt_offset=%x, size=%x\n",
stolen_offset, gtt_offset, size);
/* KISS and expect everything to be page-aligned */
if (WARN_ON(size == 0) ||
WARN_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(size, I915_GTT_PAGE_SIZE)) ||
WARN_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(stolen_offset, I915_GTT_MIN_ALIGNMENT)))
return NULL;
stolen = kzalloc(sizeof(*stolen), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!stolen)
return NULL;
stolen->start = stolen_offset;
stolen->size = size;
mutex_lock(&dev_priv->mm.stolen_lock);
ret = drm_mm_reserve_node(&dev_priv->mm.stolen, stolen);
mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->mm.stolen_lock);
if (ret) {
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("failed to allocate stolen space\n");
kfree(stolen);
return NULL;
}
obj = _i915_gem_object_create_stolen(dev_priv, stolen);
if (obj == NULL) {
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("failed to allocate stolen object\n");
i915_gem_stolen_remove_node(dev_priv, stolen);
kfree(stolen);
return NULL;
}
/* Some objects just need physical mem from stolen space */
if (gtt_offset == I915_GTT_OFFSET_NONE)
return obj;
ret = i915_gem_object_pin_pages(obj);
if (ret)
goto err;
vma = i915_vma_instance(obj, &ggtt->base, NULL);
if (IS_ERR(vma)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(vma);
goto err_pages;
}
/* To simplify the initialisation sequence between KMS and GTT,
* we allow construction of the stolen object prior to
* setting up the GTT space. The actual reservation will occur
* later.
*/
ret = i915_gem_gtt_reserve(&ggtt->base, &vma->node,
size, gtt_offset, obj->cache_level,
0);
if (ret) {
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("failed to allocate stolen GTT space\n");
goto err_pages;
}
GEM_BUG_ON(!drm_mm_node_allocated(&vma->node));
vma->pages = obj->mm.pages;
vma->flags |= I915_VMA_GLOBAL_BIND;
__i915_vma_set_map_and_fenceable(vma);
list_move_tail(&vma->vm_link, &ggtt->base.inactive_list);
spin_lock(&dev_priv->mm.obj_lock);
list_move_tail(&obj->mm.link, &dev_priv->mm.bound_list);
obj->bind_count++;
spin_unlock(&dev_priv->mm.obj_lock);
return obj;
err_pages:
i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj);
err:
i915_gem_object_put(obj);
return NULL;
}