| Message ID | 20230818024558.10780-1-sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | drm/i915: Add intel_pcode_probe | expand |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Intel-gfx <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of > Sujaritha Sundaresan > Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 8:16 AM > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add intel_pcode_probe > > Added intel_pcode_probe, promoted wait for lmem init and intel_pcode_init > prior to mmio_probe during load, so that GT registers can be accessed only > after this, else MCA is observed. > > Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> Both DG1 and DG2 crashed during i915_pci_probe. BAT is failing. Thanks, Anshuman Gupta. > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 12 ---------- > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c > index f8dbee7a5af7..92cafceaf447 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c > @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ > #include "i915_memcpy.h" > #include "i915_perf.h" > #include "i915_query.h" > +#include "i915_reg.h" > #include "i915_suspend.h" > #include "i915_switcheroo.h" > #include "i915_sysfs.h" > @@ -436,6 +437,32 @@ static int i915_pcode_init(struct drm_i915_private > *i915) > return 0; > } > > +static int intel_pcode_probe(struct drm_i915_private *i915) { > + struct intel_uncore *uncore; > + int ret; > + > + /* > + * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. > + * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to > + * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate > with it > + * and we should not continue with driver initialization. > + */ > + if (IS_DGFX(i915) && > + !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) > { > + drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); > + return -ENODEV; > + } > + > + /* > + * Driver handshakes with pcode via mailbox command to know that > SoC > + * initialization is complete before proceeding further > + */ > + ret = i915_pcode_init(i915); > + > + return ret; > +} > + > /** > * i915_driver_hw_probe - setup state requiring device access > * @dev_priv: device private > @@ -547,10 +574,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct > drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > intel_opregion_setup(dev_priv); > > - ret = i915_pcode_init(dev_priv); > - if (ret) > - goto err_opregion; > - > /* > * Fill the dram structure to get the system dram info. This will be > * used for memory latency calculation. > @@ -561,8 +584,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct > drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > return 0; > > -err_opregion: > - intel_opregion_cleanup(dev_priv); > err_msi: > if (pdev->msi_enabled) > pci_disable_msi(pdev); > @@ -778,6 +799,10 @@ int i915_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const > struct pci_device_id *ent) > if (ret < 0) > goto out_runtime_pm_put; > > + ret = intel_pcode_probe(i915); > + if (ret) > + goto out_tiles_cleanup; > + > ret = i915_driver_mmio_probe(i915); > if (ret < 0) > goto out_tiles_cleanup; > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > index dfefad5a5fec..4a353d4adf86 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > @@ -2658,18 +2658,6 @@ int intel_uncore_init_mmio(struct intel_uncore > *uncore) > if (ret) > return ret; > > - /* > - * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. > - * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to > - * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate > with it > - * and we should not continue with driver initialization. > - */ > - if (IS_DGFX(i915) && > - !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) { > - drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); > - return -ENODEV; > - } > - > if (GRAPHICS_VER(i915) > 5 && !intel_vgpu_active(i915)) > uncore->flags |= UNCORE_HAS_FORCEWAKE; > > -- > 2.41.0
On 8/18/2023 11:30 AM, Gupta, Anshuman wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Intel-gfx <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of >> Sujaritha Sundaresan >> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 8:16 AM >> To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add intel_pcode_probe >> >> Added intel_pcode_probe, promoted wait for lmem init and intel_pcode_init >> prior to mmio_probe during load, so that GT registers can be accessed only >> after this, else MCA is observed. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> > Both DG1 and DG2 crashed during i915_pci_probe. > BAT is failing. > Thanks, > Anshuman Gupta. Hi Anshuman, Yes I'm currently looking into it. Thanks, Suja >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 12 ---------- >> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >> index f8dbee7a5af7..92cafceaf447 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ >> #include "i915_memcpy.h" >> #include "i915_perf.h" >> #include "i915_query.h" >> +#include "i915_reg.h" >> #include "i915_suspend.h" >> #include "i915_switcheroo.h" >> #include "i915_sysfs.h" >> @@ -436,6 +437,32 @@ static int i915_pcode_init(struct drm_i915_private >> *i915) >> return 0; >> } >> >> +static int intel_pcode_probe(struct drm_i915_private *i915) { >> + struct intel_uncore *uncore; >> + int ret; >> + >> + /* >> + * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. >> + * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to >> + * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate >> with it >> + * and we should not continue with driver initialization. >> + */ >> + if (IS_DGFX(i915) && >> + !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) >> { >> + drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); >> + return -ENODEV; >> + } >> + >> + /* >> + * Driver handshakes with pcode via mailbox command to know that >> SoC >> + * initialization is complete before proceeding further >> + */ >> + ret = i915_pcode_init(i915); >> + >> + return ret; >> +} >> + >> /** >> * i915_driver_hw_probe - setup state requiring device access >> * @dev_priv: device private >> @@ -547,10 +574,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct >> drm_i915_private *dev_priv) >> >> intel_opregion_setup(dev_priv); >> >> - ret = i915_pcode_init(dev_priv); >> - if (ret) >> - goto err_opregion; >> - >> /* >> * Fill the dram structure to get the system dram info. This will be >> * used for memory latency calculation. >> @@ -561,8 +584,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct >> drm_i915_private *dev_priv) >> >> return 0; >> >> -err_opregion: >> - intel_opregion_cleanup(dev_priv); >> err_msi: >> if (pdev->msi_enabled) >> pci_disable_msi(pdev); >> @@ -778,6 +799,10 @@ int i915_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const >> struct pci_device_id *ent) >> if (ret < 0) >> goto out_runtime_pm_put; >> >> + ret = intel_pcode_probe(i915); >> + if (ret) >> + goto out_tiles_cleanup; >> + >> ret = i915_driver_mmio_probe(i915); >> if (ret < 0) >> goto out_tiles_cleanup; >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c >> index dfefad5a5fec..4a353d4adf86 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c >> @@ -2658,18 +2658,6 @@ int intel_uncore_init_mmio(struct intel_uncore >> *uncore) >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> >> - /* >> - * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. >> - * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to >> - * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate >> with it >> - * and we should not continue with driver initialization. >> - */ >> - if (IS_DGFX(i915) && >> - !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) { >> - drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); >> - return -ENODEV; >> - } >> - >> if (GRAPHICS_VER(i915) > 5 && !intel_vgpu_active(i915)) >> uncore->flags |= UNCORE_HAS_FORCEWAKE; >> >> -- >> 2.41.0
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:32:27AM +0530, Sundaresan, Sujaritha wrote: > > On 8/18/2023 11:30 AM, Gupta, Anshuman wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Intel-gfx <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of > > > Sujaritha Sundaresan > > > Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 8:16 AM > > > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > > Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add intel_pcode_probe > > > > > > Added intel_pcode_probe, promoted wait for lmem init and intel_pcode_init > > > prior to mmio_probe during load, so that GT registers can be accessed only > > > after this, else MCA is observed. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> > > Both DG1 and DG2 crashed during i915_pci_probe. > > BAT is failing. > > Thanks, > > Anshuman Gupta. > > Hi Anshuman, > > Yes I'm currently looking into it. > > Thanks, > > Suja > > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 12 ---------- > > > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c > > > index f8dbee7a5af7..92cafceaf447 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c > > > @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ > > > #include "i915_memcpy.h" > > > #include "i915_perf.h" > > > #include "i915_query.h" > > > +#include "i915_reg.h" > > > #include "i915_suspend.h" > > > #include "i915_switcheroo.h" > > > #include "i915_sysfs.h" > > > @@ -436,6 +437,32 @@ static int i915_pcode_init(struct drm_i915_private > > > *i915) > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > +static int intel_pcode_probe(struct drm_i915_private *i915) { > > > + struct intel_uncore *uncore; > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. > > > + * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to > > > + * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate > > > with it > > > + * and we should not continue with driver initialization. > > > + */ > > > + if (IS_DGFX(i915) && > > > + !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) > > > { > > > + drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > + } > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * Driver handshakes with pcode via mailbox command to know that > > > SoC > > > + * initialization is complete before proceeding further > > > + */ > > > + ret = i915_pcode_init(i915); > > > + > > > + return ret; > > > +} > > > + > > > /** > > > * i915_driver_hw_probe - setup state requiring device access > > > * @dev_priv: device private > > > @@ -547,10 +574,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct > > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > > > > > intel_opregion_setup(dev_priv); > > > > > > - ret = i915_pcode_init(dev_priv); > > > - if (ret) > > > - goto err_opregion; > > > - > > > /* > > > * Fill the dram structure to get the system dram info. This will be > > > * used for memory latency calculation. > > > @@ -561,8 +584,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct > > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > -err_opregion: > > > - intel_opregion_cleanup(dev_priv); > > > err_msi: > > > if (pdev->msi_enabled) > > > pci_disable_msi(pdev); > > > @@ -778,6 +799,10 @@ int i915_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const > > > struct pci_device_id *ent) > > > if (ret < 0) > > > goto out_runtime_pm_put; > > > > > > + ret = intel_pcode_probe(i915); > > > + if (ret) > > > + goto out_tiles_cleanup; > > > + > > > ret = i915_driver_mmio_probe(i915); chicken-egg problem here?! I don't believe this could ever work. You need the MMIO space to be able to communicate with PCODE mailbox and check the lmem init, no?! I believe the bug is that PCODE check should come before the LMEM_INIT check. LMEM won't be ready before pcode state that everything was ready for the lmem access. And on your code pcode ready check is still after the lmem. Cc: Aravind Iddamsetty <aravind.iddamsetty@intel.com> who was recently raising that we had an order problem there. > > > if (ret < 0) > > > goto out_tiles_cleanup; > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > > > index dfefad5a5fec..4a353d4adf86 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > > > @@ -2658,18 +2658,6 @@ int intel_uncore_init_mmio(struct intel_uncore > > > *uncore) > > > if (ret) > > > return ret; > > > > > > - /* > > > - * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. > > > - * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to > > > - * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate > > > with it > > > - * and we should not continue with driver initialization. > > > - */ > > > - if (IS_DGFX(i915) && > > > - !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) { > > > - drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); > > > - return -ENODEV; > > > - } > > > - > > > if (GRAPHICS_VER(i915) > 5 && !intel_vgpu_active(i915)) > > > uncore->flags |= UNCORE_HAS_FORCEWAKE; > > > > > > -- > > > 2.41.0
On 8/18/2023 6:29 PM, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:32:27AM +0530, Sundaresan, Sujaritha wrote: >> On 8/18/2023 11:30 AM, Gupta, Anshuman wrote: >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Intel-gfx <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of >>>> Sujaritha Sundaresan >>>> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 8:16 AM >>>> To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >>>> Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add intel_pcode_probe >>>> >>>> Added intel_pcode_probe, promoted wait for lmem init and intel_pcode_init >>>> prior to mmio_probe during load, so that GT registers can be accessed only >>>> after this, else MCA is observed. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> >>> Both DG1 and DG2 crashed during i915_pci_probe. >>> BAT is failing. >>> Thanks, >>> Anshuman Gupta. >> Hi Anshuman, >> >> Yes I'm currently looking into it. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Suja >> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 12 ---------- >>>> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >>>> index f8dbee7a5af7..92cafceaf447 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >>>> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ >>>> #include "i915_memcpy.h" >>>> #include "i915_perf.h" >>>> #include "i915_query.h" >>>> +#include "i915_reg.h" >>>> #include "i915_suspend.h" >>>> #include "i915_switcheroo.h" >>>> #include "i915_sysfs.h" >>>> @@ -436,6 +437,32 @@ static int i915_pcode_init(struct drm_i915_private >>>> *i915) >>>> return 0; >>>> } >>>> >>>> +static int intel_pcode_probe(struct drm_i915_private *i915) { >>>> + struct intel_uncore *uncore; >>>> + int ret; >>>> + >>>> + /* >>>> + * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. >>>> + * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to >>>> + * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate >>>> with it >>>> + * and we should not continue with driver initialization. >>>> + */ >>>> + if (IS_DGFX(i915) && >>>> + !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) >>>> { >>>> + drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); >>>> + return -ENODEV; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + /* >>>> + * Driver handshakes with pcode via mailbox command to know that >>>> SoC >>>> + * initialization is complete before proceeding further >>>> + */ >>>> + ret = i915_pcode_init(i915); >>>> + >>>> + return ret; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> /** >>>> * i915_driver_hw_probe - setup state requiring device access >>>> * @dev_priv: device private >>>> @@ -547,10 +574,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct >>>> drm_i915_private *dev_priv) >>>> >>>> intel_opregion_setup(dev_priv); >>>> >>>> - ret = i915_pcode_init(dev_priv); >>>> - if (ret) >>>> - goto err_opregion; >>>> - >>>> /* >>>> * Fill the dram structure to get the system dram info. This will be >>>> * used for memory latency calculation. >>>> @@ -561,8 +584,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct >>>> drm_i915_private *dev_priv) >>>> >>>> return 0; >>>> >>>> -err_opregion: >>>> - intel_opregion_cleanup(dev_priv); >>>> err_msi: >>>> if (pdev->msi_enabled) >>>> pci_disable_msi(pdev); >>>> @@ -778,6 +799,10 @@ int i915_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const >>>> struct pci_device_id *ent) >>>> if (ret < 0) >>>> goto out_runtime_pm_put; >>>> >>>> + ret = intel_pcode_probe(i915); >>>> + if (ret) >>>> + goto out_tiles_cleanup; >>>> + >>>> ret = i915_driver_mmio_probe(i915); > chicken-egg problem here?! > > I don't believe this could ever work. You need the MMIO space to be able > to communicate with PCODE mailbox and check the lmem init, no?! > > I believe the bug is that PCODE check should come before the LMEM_INIT > check. > > LMEM won't be ready before pcode state that everything was ready for > the lmem access. And on your code pcode ready check is still after > the lmem. > > Cc: Aravind Iddamsetty <aravind.iddamsetty@intel.com> > > who was recently raising that we had an order problem there. Yes looks like there is definitely an ordering issue. Will look into this more. > >>>> if (ret < 0) >>>> goto out_tiles_cleanup; >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c >>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c >>>> index dfefad5a5fec..4a353d4adf86 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c >>>> @@ -2658,18 +2658,6 @@ int intel_uncore_init_mmio(struct intel_uncore >>>> *uncore) >>>> if (ret) >>>> return ret; >>>> >>>> - /* >>>> - * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. >>>> - * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to >>>> - * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate >>>> with it >>>> - * and we should not continue with driver initialization. >>>> - */ >>>> - if (IS_DGFX(i915) && >>>> - !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) { >>>> - drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); >>>> - return -ENODEV; >>>> - } >>>> - >>>> if (GRAPHICS_VER(i915) > 5 && !intel_vgpu_active(i915)) >>>> uncore->flags |= UNCORE_HAS_FORCEWAKE; >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 2.41.0
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c index f8dbee7a5af7..92cafceaf447 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ #include "i915_memcpy.h" #include "i915_perf.h" #include "i915_query.h" +#include "i915_reg.h" #include "i915_suspend.h" #include "i915_switcheroo.h" #include "i915_sysfs.h" @@ -436,6 +437,32 @@ static int i915_pcode_init(struct drm_i915_private *i915) return 0; } +static int intel_pcode_probe(struct drm_i915_private *i915) +{ + struct intel_uncore *uncore; + int ret; + + /* + * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. + * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to + * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate with it + * and we should not continue with driver initialization. + */ + if (IS_DGFX(i915) && + !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) { + drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + /* + * Driver handshakes with pcode via mailbox command to know that SoC + * initialization is complete before proceeding further + */ + ret = i915_pcode_init(i915); + + return ret; +} + /** * i915_driver_hw_probe - setup state requiring device access * @dev_priv: device private @@ -547,10 +574,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) intel_opregion_setup(dev_priv); - ret = i915_pcode_init(dev_priv); - if (ret) - goto err_opregion; - /* * Fill the dram structure to get the system dram info. This will be * used for memory latency calculation. @@ -561,8 +584,6 @@ static int i915_driver_hw_probe(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) return 0; -err_opregion: - intel_opregion_cleanup(dev_priv); err_msi: if (pdev->msi_enabled) pci_disable_msi(pdev); @@ -778,6 +799,10 @@ int i915_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent) if (ret < 0) goto out_runtime_pm_put; + ret = intel_pcode_probe(i915); + if (ret) + goto out_tiles_cleanup; + ret = i915_driver_mmio_probe(i915); if (ret < 0) goto out_tiles_cleanup; diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c index dfefad5a5fec..4a353d4adf86 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c @@ -2658,18 +2658,6 @@ int intel_uncore_init_mmio(struct intel_uncore *uncore) if (ret) return ret; - /* - * The boot firmware initializes local memory and assesses its health. - * If memory training fails, the punit will have been instructed to - * keep the GT powered down; we won't be able to communicate with it - * and we should not continue with driver initialization. - */ - if (IS_DGFX(i915) && - !(__raw_uncore_read32(uncore, GU_CNTL) & LMEM_INIT)) { - drm_err(&i915->drm, "LMEM not initialized by firmware\n"); - return -ENODEV; - } - if (GRAPHICS_VER(i915) > 5 && !intel_vgpu_active(i915)) uncore->flags |= UNCORE_HAS_FORCEWAKE;
Added intel_pcode_probe, promoted wait for lmem init and intel_pcode_init prior to mmio_probe during load, so that GT registers can be accessed only after this, else MCA is observed. Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 12 ---------- 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)