lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 04/10] gpu: host1x: Lock classes during job submission
From
Date
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.

>
>> + 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?

Mikko

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-08 21:04    [W:1.397 / U:0.392 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site