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

533 lines
14 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*
* Copyright © 2013 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.
*
*/
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
#include <asm/iosf_mbi.h>
#include "i915_drv.h"
#include "intel_sideband.h"
/*
* IOSF sideband, see VLV2_SidebandMsg_HAS.docx and
* VLV_VLV2_PUNIT_HAS_0.8.docx
*/
/* Standard MMIO read, non-posted */
#define SB_MRD_NP 0x00
/* Standard MMIO write, non-posted */
#define SB_MWR_NP 0x01
/* Private register read, double-word addressing, non-posted */
#define SB_CRRDDA_NP 0x06
/* Private register write, double-word addressing, non-posted */
#define SB_CRWRDA_NP 0x07
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
static void ping(void *info)
{
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
static void __vlv_punit_get(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
{
iosf_mbi_punit_acquire();
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
/*
* Prevent the cpu from sleeping while we use this sideband, otherwise
* the punit may cause a machine hang. The issue appears to be isolated
* with changing the power state of the CPU package while changing
* the power state via the punit, and we have only observed it
* reliably on 4-core Baytail systems suggesting the issue is in the
* power delivery mechanism and likely to be be board/function
* specific. Hence we presume the workaround needs only be applied
* to the Valleyview P-unit and not all sideband communications.
*/
if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(i915)) {
pm_qos_update_request(&i915->sb_qos, 0);
on_each_cpu(ping, NULL, 1);
}
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
static void __vlv_punit_put(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
{
if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(i915))
pm_qos_update_request(&i915->sb_qos, PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
iosf_mbi_punit_release();
}
void vlv_iosf_sb_get(struct drm_i915_private *i915, unsigned long ports)
{
if (ports & BIT(VLV_IOSF_SB_PUNIT))
__vlv_punit_get(i915);
mutex_lock(&i915->sb_lock);
}
void vlv_iosf_sb_put(struct drm_i915_private *i915, unsigned long ports)
{
mutex_unlock(&i915->sb_lock);
if (ports & BIT(VLV_IOSF_SB_PUNIT))
__vlv_punit_put(i915);
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
static int vlv_sideband_rw(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
u32 devfn, u32 port, u32 opcode,
u32 addr, u32 *val)
{
struct intel_uncore *uncore = &i915->uncore;
const bool is_read = (opcode == SB_MRD_NP || opcode == SB_CRRDDA_NP);
int err;
lockdep_assert_held(&i915->sb_lock);
if (port == IOSF_PORT_PUNIT)
iosf_mbi_assert_punit_acquired();
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
/* Flush the previous comms, just in case it failed last time. */
if (intel_wait_for_register(uncore,
VLV_IOSF_DOORBELL_REQ, IOSF_SB_BUSY, 0,
5)) {
DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("IOSF sideband idle wait (%s) timed out\n",
is_read ? "read" : "write");
return -EAGAIN;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
preempt_disable();
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, VLV_IOSF_ADDR, addr);
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, VLV_IOSF_DATA, is_read ? 0 : *val);
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, VLV_IOSF_DOORBELL_REQ,
(devfn << IOSF_DEVFN_SHIFT) |
(opcode << IOSF_OPCODE_SHIFT) |
(port << IOSF_PORT_SHIFT) |
(0xf << IOSF_BYTE_ENABLES_SHIFT) |
(0 << IOSF_BAR_SHIFT) |
IOSF_SB_BUSY);
if (__intel_wait_for_register_fw(uncore,
VLV_IOSF_DOORBELL_REQ, IOSF_SB_BUSY, 0,
10000, 0, NULL) == 0) {
if (is_read)
*val = intel_uncore_read_fw(uncore, VLV_IOSF_DATA);
err = 0;
} else {
DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("IOSF sideband finish wait (%s) timed out\n",
is_read ? "read" : "write");
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
err = -ETIMEDOUT;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
preempt_enable();
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
return err;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
u32 vlv_punit_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 addr)
{
u32 val = 0;
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_PUNIT,
SB_CRRDDA_NP, addr, &val);
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
return val;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
int vlv_punit_write(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 addr, u32 val)
{
return vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_PUNIT,
SB_CRWRDA_NP, addr, &val);
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
u32 vlv_bunit_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 reg)
{
u32 val = 0;
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_BUNIT,
SB_CRRDDA_NP, reg, &val);
return val;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
void vlv_bunit_write(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 reg, u32 val)
{
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_BUNIT,
SB_CRWRDA_NP, reg, &val);
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
u32 vlv_nc_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u8 addr)
{
u32 val = 0;
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_NC,
SB_CRRDDA_NP, addr, &val);
return val;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
u32 vlv_iosf_sb_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u8 port, u32 reg)
{
u32 val = 0;
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), port,
SB_CRRDDA_NP, reg, &val);
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
return val;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
void vlv_iosf_sb_write(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
u8 port, u32 reg, u32 val)
{
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), port,
SB_CRWRDA_NP, reg, &val);
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
u32 vlv_cck_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 reg)
{
u32 val = 0;
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_CCK,
SB_CRRDDA_NP, reg, &val);
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
return val;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
void vlv_cck_write(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 reg, u32 val)
{
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_CCK,
SB_CRWRDA_NP, reg, &val);
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
u32 vlv_ccu_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 reg)
{
u32 val = 0;
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_CCU,
SB_CRRDDA_NP, reg, &val);
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
return val;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
void vlv_ccu_write(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 reg, u32 val)
{
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0), IOSF_PORT_CCU,
SB_CRWRDA_NP, reg, &val);
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
u32 vlv_dpio_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, enum pipe pipe, int reg)
{
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
int port = i915->dpio_phy_iosf_port[DPIO_PHY(pipe)];
u32 val = 0;
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, DPIO_DEVFN, port, SB_MRD_NP, reg, &val);
/*
* FIXME: There might be some registers where all 1's is a valid value,
* so ideally we should check the register offset instead...
*/
WARN(val == 0xffffffff, "DPIO read pipe %c reg 0x%x == 0x%x\n",
pipe_name(pipe), reg, val);
return val;
}
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
void vlv_dpio_write(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
enum pipe pipe, int reg, u32 val)
{
int port = i915->dpio_phy_iosf_port[DPIO_PHY(pipe)];
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, DPIO_DEVFN, port, SB_MWR_NP, reg, &val);
}
u32 vlv_flisdsi_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 reg)
{
drm/i915: Disable preemption and sleeping while using the punit sideband While we talk to the punit over its sideband, we need to prevent the cpu from sleeping in order to prevent a potential machine hang. Note that by itself, it appears that pm_qos_update_request (via intel_idle) doesn't provide a sufficient barrier to ensure that all core are indeed awake (out of Cstate) and that the package is awake. To do so, we need to supplement the pm_qos with a manual ping on_each_cpu. v2: Restrict the heavy-weight wakeup to just the ISOF_PORT_PUNIT, there is insufficient evidence to implicate a wider problem atm. Similarly, restrict the w/a to Valleyview, as Cherryview doesn't have an angry cadre of users. The working theory, courtesy of Ville and Hans, is the issue lies within the power delivery and so is likely to be unit and board specific and occurs when both the unit/fw require extra power at the same time as the cpu package is changing its own power state. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051 References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102657 References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195255 Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190426081725.31217-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-04-26 15:17:18 +07:00
u32 val = 0;
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, DPIO_DEVFN, IOSF_PORT_FLISDSI, SB_CRRDDA_NP,
reg, &val);
return val;
}
void vlv_flisdsi_write(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 reg, u32 val)
{
vlv_sideband_rw(i915, DPIO_DEVFN, IOSF_PORT_FLISDSI, SB_CRWRDA_NP,
reg, &val);
}
/* SBI access */
static int intel_sbi_rw(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u16 reg,
enum intel_sbi_destination destination,
u32 *val, bool is_read)
{
struct intel_uncore *uncore = &i915->uncore;
u32 cmd;
lockdep_assert_held(&i915->sb_lock);
if (intel_wait_for_register_fw(uncore,
SBI_CTL_STAT, SBI_BUSY, 0,
100)) {
DRM_ERROR("timeout waiting for SBI to become ready\n");
return -EBUSY;
}
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, SBI_ADDR, (u32)reg << 16);
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, SBI_DATA, is_read ? 0 : *val);
if (destination == SBI_ICLK)
cmd = SBI_CTL_DEST_ICLK | SBI_CTL_OP_CRRD;
else
cmd = SBI_CTL_DEST_MPHY | SBI_CTL_OP_IORD;
if (!is_read)
cmd |= BIT(8);
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, SBI_CTL_STAT, cmd | SBI_BUSY);
if (__intel_wait_for_register_fw(uncore,
SBI_CTL_STAT, SBI_BUSY, 0,
100, 100, &cmd)) {
DRM_ERROR("timeout waiting for SBI to complete read\n");
return -ETIMEDOUT;
}
if (cmd & SBI_RESPONSE_FAIL) {
DRM_ERROR("error during SBI read of reg %x\n", reg);
return -ENXIO;
}
if (is_read)
*val = intel_uncore_read_fw(uncore, SBI_DATA);
return 0;
}
u32 intel_sbi_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u16 reg,
enum intel_sbi_destination destination)
{
u32 result = 0;
intel_sbi_rw(i915, reg, destination, &result, true);
return result;
}
void intel_sbi_write(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u16 reg, u32 value,
enum intel_sbi_destination destination)
{
intel_sbi_rw(i915, reg, destination, &value, false);
}
static inline int gen6_check_mailbox_status(u32 mbox)
{
switch (mbox & GEN6_PCODE_ERROR_MASK) {
case GEN6_PCODE_SUCCESS:
return 0;
case GEN6_PCODE_UNIMPLEMENTED_CMD:
return -ENODEV;
case GEN6_PCODE_ILLEGAL_CMD:
return -ENXIO;
case GEN6_PCODE_MIN_FREQ_TABLE_GT_RATIO_OUT_OF_RANGE:
case GEN7_PCODE_MIN_FREQ_TABLE_GT_RATIO_OUT_OF_RANGE:
return -EOVERFLOW;
case GEN6_PCODE_TIMEOUT:
return -ETIMEDOUT;
default:
MISSING_CASE(mbox & GEN6_PCODE_ERROR_MASK);
return 0;
}
}
static inline int gen7_check_mailbox_status(u32 mbox)
{
switch (mbox & GEN6_PCODE_ERROR_MASK) {
case GEN6_PCODE_SUCCESS:
return 0;
case GEN6_PCODE_ILLEGAL_CMD:
return -ENXIO;
case GEN7_PCODE_TIMEOUT:
return -ETIMEDOUT;
case GEN7_PCODE_ILLEGAL_DATA:
return -EINVAL;
case GEN7_PCODE_MIN_FREQ_TABLE_GT_RATIO_OUT_OF_RANGE:
return -EOVERFLOW;
default:
MISSING_CASE(mbox & GEN6_PCODE_ERROR_MASK);
return 0;
}
}
static int __sandybridge_pcode_rw(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
u32 mbox, u32 *val, u32 *val1,
int fast_timeout_us,
int slow_timeout_ms,
bool is_read)
{
struct intel_uncore *uncore = &i915->uncore;
lockdep_assert_held(&i915->sb_lock);
/*
* GEN6_PCODE_* are outside of the forcewake domain, we can
* use te fw I915_READ variants to reduce the amount of work
* required when reading/writing.
*/
if (intel_uncore_read_fw(uncore, GEN6_PCODE_MAILBOX) & GEN6_PCODE_READY)
return -EAGAIN;
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, GEN6_PCODE_DATA, *val);
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore, GEN6_PCODE_DATA1, val1 ? *val1 : 0);
intel_uncore_write_fw(uncore,
GEN6_PCODE_MAILBOX, GEN6_PCODE_READY | mbox);
if (__intel_wait_for_register_fw(uncore,
GEN6_PCODE_MAILBOX,
GEN6_PCODE_READY, 0,
fast_timeout_us,
slow_timeout_ms,
&mbox))
return -ETIMEDOUT;
if (is_read)
*val = intel_uncore_read_fw(uncore, GEN6_PCODE_DATA);
if (is_read && val1)
*val1 = intel_uncore_read_fw(uncore, GEN6_PCODE_DATA1);
if (INTEL_GEN(i915) > 6)
return gen7_check_mailbox_status(mbox);
else
return gen6_check_mailbox_status(mbox);
}
int sandybridge_pcode_read(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox,
u32 *val, u32 *val1)
{
int err;
mutex_lock(&i915->sb_lock);
err = __sandybridge_pcode_rw(i915, mbox, val, val1,
500, 0,
true);
mutex_unlock(&i915->sb_lock);
if (err) {
DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("warning: pcode (read from mbox %x) mailbox access failed for %ps: %d\n",
mbox, __builtin_return_address(0), err);
}
return err;
}
int sandybridge_pcode_write_timeout(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
u32 mbox, u32 val,
int fast_timeout_us,
int slow_timeout_ms)
{
int err;
mutex_lock(&i915->sb_lock);
err = __sandybridge_pcode_rw(i915, mbox, &val, NULL,
fast_timeout_us, slow_timeout_ms,
false);
mutex_unlock(&i915->sb_lock);
if (err) {
DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("warning: pcode (write of 0x%08x to mbox %x) mailbox access failed for %ps: %d\n",
val, mbox, __builtin_return_address(0), err);
}
return err;
}
static bool skl_pcode_try_request(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox,
u32 request, u32 reply_mask, u32 reply,
u32 *status)
{
*status = __sandybridge_pcode_rw(i915, mbox, &request, NULL,
500, 0,
true);
return *status || ((request & reply_mask) == reply);
}
/**
* skl_pcode_request - send PCODE request until acknowledgment
* @i915: device private
* @mbox: PCODE mailbox ID the request is targeted for
* @request: request ID
* @reply_mask: mask used to check for request acknowledgment
* @reply: value used to check for request acknowledgment
* @timeout_base_ms: timeout for polling with preemption enabled
*
* Keep resending the @request to @mbox until PCODE acknowledges it, PCODE
* reports an error or an overall timeout of @timeout_base_ms+50 ms expires.
* The request is acknowledged once the PCODE reply dword equals @reply after
* applying @reply_mask. Polling is first attempted with preemption enabled
* for @timeout_base_ms and if this times out for another 50 ms with
* preemption disabled.
*
* Returns 0 on success, %-ETIMEDOUT in case of a timeout, <0 in case of some
* other error as reported by PCODE.
*/
int skl_pcode_request(struct drm_i915_private *i915, u32 mbox, u32 request,
u32 reply_mask, u32 reply, int timeout_base_ms)
{
u32 status;
int ret;
mutex_lock(&i915->sb_lock);
#define COND \
skl_pcode_try_request(i915, mbox, request, reply_mask, reply, &status)
/*
* Prime the PCODE by doing a request first. Normally it guarantees
* that a subsequent request, at most @timeout_base_ms later, succeeds.
* _wait_for() doesn't guarantee when its passed condition is evaluated
* first, so send the first request explicitly.
*/
if (COND) {
ret = 0;
goto out;
}
ret = _wait_for(COND, timeout_base_ms * 1000, 10, 10);
if (!ret)
goto out;
/*
* The above can time out if the number of requests was low (2 in the
* worst case) _and_ PCODE was busy for some reason even after a
* (queued) request and @timeout_base_ms delay. As a workaround retry
* the poll with preemption disabled to maximize the number of
* requests. Increase the timeout from @timeout_base_ms to 50ms to
* account for interrupts that could reduce the number of these
* requests, and for any quirks of the PCODE firmware that delays
* the request completion.
*/
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PCODE timeout, retrying with preemption disabled\n");
WARN_ON_ONCE(timeout_base_ms > 3);
preempt_disable();
ret = wait_for_atomic(COND, 50);
preempt_enable();
out:
mutex_unlock(&i915->sb_lock);
return ret ? ret : status;
#undef COND
}