| Message ID | 1438619136-18268-5-git-send-email-animesh.manna@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Monday 03 August 2015 09:55 PM, Animesh Manna wrote: > Another interesting criteria to work dmc as expected is pw1 to be > enabled by driver and dmc will shut it off in its execution > sequence. If already disabled by driver dmc will get confuse and > behave differently than expected found during pc10 entry issue > for skl. > > So berfore we disable power-well 1, added check if dmc firmware is > present and driver will not disable power well 1, but for any reason > if firmware is not present of failed to load we can shut off the > power well 1 which will save some power. > > As skl is currently fully dependent on dmc to go in lowest possible > power state (dc6) but the same is not applicable for bxt. Display > engine can enter into dc9 without dmc, hence unblocking disable call. > > v1: Initial version. > > v2: Based on revire commnents from Sunil, > - condition check for pw1 is moved in skl_set_power_well. > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> > Cc: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> > Cc: Sunil Kamath <sunil.kamath@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c | 12 +++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > index c660245..00cd4ff 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > @@ -636,9 +636,15 @@ static void skl_set_power_well(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > } > } else { > if (enable_requested) { > - I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); > - POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); > - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); > + if (IS_SKYLAKE(dev) && > + (power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_1) && > + (intel_csr_load_status_get(dev_priv) == FW_LOADED)) > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Not Disabling PW1, dmc will handle\n"); > + else { > + I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); > + POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); > + } > > if (GEN9_ENABLE_DC5(dev) && > power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_2) Right bug fix. Reviewed-by: A.Sunil Kamath <sunil.kamath@intel.com>
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 09:55:35PM +0530, Animesh Manna wrote: > Another interesting criteria to work dmc as expected is pw1 to be > enabled by driver and dmc will shut it off in its execution > sequence. If already disabled by driver dmc will get confuse and > behave differently than expected found during pc10 entry issue > for skl. > > So berfore we disable power-well 1, added check if dmc firmware is > present and driver will not disable power well 1, but for any reason > if firmware is not present of failed to load we can shut off the > power well 1 which will save some power. > > As skl is currently fully dependent on dmc to go in lowest possible > power state (dc6) but the same is not applicable for bxt. Display > engine can enter into dc9 without dmc, hence unblocking disable call. > > v1: Initial version. > > v2: Based on revire commnents from Sunil, > - condition check for pw1 is moved in skl_set_power_well. There's another patch from Damien/Paulo to do some similar fumbling between LCPLL and PW1. We probably want to completely take away PW1 from being controlled by the power wells code and push it all into the rpm code (where we either disable pw1, pw-misc and lcpll in one go or leave it all to the dmc firmware). -Daniel > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> > Cc: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> > Cc: Sunil Kamath <sunil.kamath@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c | 12 +++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > index c660245..00cd4ff 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > @@ -636,9 +636,15 @@ static void skl_set_power_well(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > } > } else { > if (enable_requested) { > - I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); > - POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); > - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); > + if (IS_SKYLAKE(dev) && > + (power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_1) && > + (intel_csr_load_status_get(dev_priv) == FW_LOADED)) > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Not Disabling PW1, dmc will handle\n"); > + else { > + I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); > + POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); > + } > > if (GEN9_ENABLE_DC5(dev) && > power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_2) > -- > 2.0.2 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On 8/5/2015 2:44 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 09:55:35PM +0530, Animesh Manna wrote: >> Another interesting criteria to work dmc as expected is pw1 to be >> enabled by driver and dmc will shut it off in its execution >> sequence. If already disabled by driver dmc will get confuse and >> behave differently than expected found during pc10 entry issue >> for skl. >> >> So berfore we disable power-well 1, added check if dmc firmware is >> present and driver will not disable power well 1, but for any reason >> if firmware is not present of failed to load we can shut off the >> power well 1 which will save some power. >> >> As skl is currently fully dependent on dmc to go in lowest possible >> power state (dc6) but the same is not applicable for bxt. Display >> engine can enter into dc9 without dmc, hence unblocking disable call. >> >> v1: Initial version. >> >> v2: Based on revire commnents from Sunil, >> - condition check for pw1 is moved in skl_set_power_well. > There's another patch from Damien/Paulo to do some similar fumbling > between LCPLL and PW1. We probably want to completely take away PW1 from > being controlled by the power wells code and push it all into the rpm code > (where we either disable pw1, pw-misc and lcpll in one go or leave it all > to the dmc firmware). > -Daniel Patch from Damien/Paulo submitted in intel-gfx mailing list? I have not seen the actual implementation. skl_set_power_well() is the function where enable/disable operation for all power-wells is implemented. Imo, till we can add different condition check for taking care special cases like dmc, its better to put power-well related enable/disable code in same place - by this we will avoid code duplication and code readability will be better. Send me your suggestion, accordingly if needed I will add required changes. - Animesh > >> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> >> Cc: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> >> Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> >> Cc: Sunil Kamath <sunil.kamath@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c | 12 +++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c >> index c660245..00cd4ff 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c >> @@ -636,9 +636,15 @@ static void skl_set_power_well(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, >> } >> } else { >> if (enable_requested) { >> - I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); >> - POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); >> - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); >> + if (IS_SKYLAKE(dev) && >> + (power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_1) && >> + (intel_csr_load_status_get(dev_priv) == FW_LOADED)) >> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Not Disabling PW1, dmc will handle\n"); >> + else { >> + I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); >> + POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); >> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); >> + } >> >> if (GEN9_ENABLE_DC5(dev) && >> power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_2) >> -- >> 2.0.2 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Intel-gfx mailing list >> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On ma, 2015-08-03 at 21:55 +0530, Animesh Manna wrote: > Another interesting criteria to work dmc as expected is pw1 to be > enabled by driver and dmc will shut it off in its execution > sequence. If already disabled by driver dmc will get confuse and > behave differently than expected found during pc10 entry issue > for skl. > > So berfore we disable power-well 1, added check if dmc firmware is > present and driver will not disable power well 1, but for any reason > if firmware is not present of failed to load we can shut off the > power well 1 which will save some power. > > As skl is currently fully dependent on dmc to go in lowest possible > power state (dc6) but the same is not applicable for bxt. Display > engine can enter into dc9 without dmc, hence unblocking disable call. > > v1: Initial version. > > v2: Based on revire commnents from Sunil, > - condition check for pw1 is moved in skl_set_power_well. > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> > Cc: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> > Cc: Sunil Kamath <sunil.kamath@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c | 12 +++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > index c660245..00cd4ff 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > @@ -636,9 +636,15 @@ static void skl_set_power_well(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > } > } else { > if (enable_requested) { > - I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); > - POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); > - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); > + if (IS_SKYLAKE(dev) && > + (power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_1) && > + (intel_csr_load_status_get(dev_priv) == FW_LOADED)) We'll only ever get here with the firmware loaded, so no need to check for it. > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Not Disabling PW1, dmc will handle\n"); > + else { > + I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); > + POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); > + } Not disabling PW1 here is a good solution for now imo, but ideally we should move both PW1 enabling and disabling out from this code and do these as part of the display init/uninit sequence. This could be done as a follow-up to this patchset. > > if (GEN9_ENABLE_DC5(dev) && > power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_2)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c index c660245..00cd4ff 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c @@ -636,9 +636,15 @@ static void skl_set_power_well(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, } } else { if (enable_requested) { - I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); - POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); + if (IS_SKYLAKE(dev) && + (power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_1) && + (intel_csr_load_status_get(dev_priv) == FW_LOADED)) + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Not Disabling PW1, dmc will handle\n"); + else { + I915_WRITE(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER, tmp & ~req_mask); + POSTING_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER); + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling %s\n", power_well->name); + } if (GEN9_ENABLE_DC5(dev) && power_well->data == SKL_DISP_PW_2)