From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S934231AbdKGVXv (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 7 Nov 2017 16:23:51 -0500
Received: from mail-lf0-f49.google.com ([209.85.215.49]:45152 "EHLO
        mail-lf0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S934158AbdKGVXt (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 7 Nov 2017 16:23:49 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMb8rjXGzThMbrVX0LEDJbcwtZwrazARFPM1lK24HfID+qfVExU+Ny6iowqwdjkg1M5kSMGc5Q==
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] gpu: host1x: Lock classes during job submission
To: Mikko Perttunen <cyndis@kapsi.fi>,
        Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@nvidia.com>, thierry.reding@gmail.com,
        jonathanh@nvidia.com
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20171105110118.15142-1-mperttunen@nvidia.com>
 <20171105110118.15142-5-mperttunen@nvidia.com>
 <97ce4873-fdc1-5197-17bc-74505beadfc4@gmail.com>
 <ef08d3d8-94a7-8804-c339-5310719333f3@kapsi.fi>
From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <dc39398b-ea49-6e97-28ba-652f8b49db44@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 00:23:45 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ef08d3d8-94a7-8804-c339-5310719333f3@kapsi.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 07.11.2017 15:28, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> On 05.11.2017 18:46, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> On 05.11.2017 14:01, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>> +static int mlock_id_for_class(unsigned int class)
>>> +{
>>> +#if HOST1X_HW >= 6
>>> +    switch (class)
>>> +    {
>>> +    case HOST1X_CLASS_HOST1X:
>>> +        return 0;
>>> +    case HOST1X_CLASS_VIC:
>>> +        return 17;
>>
>> What is the meaning of returned ID values that you have defined here? Why VIC
>> should have different ID on T186?
> 
> On T186, MLOCKs are not "generic" - the HW knows that each MLOCK corresponds to
> a specific class. Therefore we must map that correctly.
> 

Okay.

>>
>>> +    default:
>>> +        return -EINVAL;
>>> +    }
>>> +#else
>>> +    switch (class)
>>> +    {
>>> +    case HOST1X_CLASS_HOST1X:
>>> +        return 0;
>>> +    case HOST1X_CLASS_GR2D:
>>> +        return 1;
>>> +    case HOST1X_CLASS_GR2D_SB:
>>> +        return 2;
>>
>> Note that we are allowing to switch 2d classes in the same jobs context and
>> currently jobs class is somewhat hardcoded to GR2D.
>>
>> Even though that GR2D and GR2D_SB use different register banks, is it okay to
>> trigger execution of different classes simultaneously? Would syncpoint
>> differentiate classes on OP_DONE event?
> 
> Good point, we might need to use the same lock for these two.
> 
>>
>> I suppose that MLOCK (the module lock) implies the whole module locking,
>> wouldn't it make sense to just use the module ID's defined in the TRM?
> 
> Can you point out where these are defined?

See INDMODID / REGF_MODULEID fields of HOST1X_CHANNEL_INDOFF2_0 /
HOST1X_SYNC_REGF_ADDR_0 registers, bit numbers of HOST1X_SYNC_INTSTATUS_0 /
HOST1X_SYNC_INTC0MASK_0 / HOST1X_SYNC_MOD_TEARDOWN_0.