| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <f88b7780-cf4f-d2f5-f2ba-cd3d7bf2a0d4@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 12:30:12 +0000
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>
To: Alexander Usyskin <alexander.usyskin@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>,
Vitaly Lubart <vitaly.lubart@...el.com>,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v7 1/5] drm/i915/gsc: add gsc as a mei
auxiliary device
On 13/02/2022 10:32, Alexander Usyskin wrote:
> From: Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
>
> GSC is a graphics system controller, it provides
> a chassis controller for graphics discrete cards.
>
> There are two MEI interfaces in GSC: HECI1 and HECI2.
>
> Both interfaces are on the BAR0 at offsets 0x00258000 and 0x00259000.
> GSC is a GT Engine (class 4: instance 6). HECI1 interrupt is signaled
> via bit 15 and HECI2 via bit 14 in the interrupt register.
>
> This patch exports GSC as auxiliary device for mei driver to bind to
> for HECI2 interface.
>
> CC: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Lubart <vitaly.lubart@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Usyskin <alexander.usyskin@...el.com>
> ---
> V4: add header to the MAINTAINERS file
> drop empty line
> V5: rebase
> V6: rebase, drop redundant assignments
> V7: add Greg KH Reviewed-by
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile | 3 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.c | 196 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.h | 37 +++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c | 3 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h | 5 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_irq.c | 13 ++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_regs.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h | 2 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 8 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c | 3 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 2 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.h | 2 +
> include/linux/mei_aux.h | 19 +++
> 15 files changed, 295 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.c
> create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.h
> create mode 100644 include/linux/mei_aux.h
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index a0c2ae3d71d8..c92d34f8522a 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -9797,6 +9797,7 @@ S: Supported
> F: Documentation/driver-api/mei/*
> F: drivers/misc/mei/
> F: drivers/watchdog/mei_wdt.c
> +F: include/linux/mei_aux.h
> F: include/linux/mei_cl_bus.h
> F: include/uapi/linux/mei.h
> F: samples/mei/*
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig
> index 2ac220bfd0ed..3b0508e7a805 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig
> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ config DRM_I915
> select VMAP_PFN
> select DRM_TTM
> select DRM_BUDDY
> + select AUXILIARY_BUS
> help
> Choose this option if you have a system that has "Intel Graphics
> Media Accelerator" or "HD Graphics" integrated graphics,
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile
> index 226dbef5f64a..e40ba71b3cdd 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile
> @@ -195,6 +195,9 @@ i915-y += gt/uc/intel_uc.o \
> gt/uc/intel_huc_debugfs.o \
> gt/uc/intel_huc_fw.o
>
> +# graphics system controller (GSC) support
> +i915-y += gt/intel_gsc.o
> +
> # modesetting core code
> i915-y += \
> display/hsw_ips.o \
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..d07f182f64e4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,196 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
> +/*
> + * Copyright(c) 2019-2022, Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/irq.h>
> +#include <linux/mei_aux.h>
> +#include "i915_reg.h"
> +#include "i915_drv.h"
> +#include "gt/intel_gt.h"
> +#include "intel_gsc.h"
> +
> +#define GSC_BAR_LENGTH 0x00000FFC
> +
> +static void gsc_irq_mask(struct irq_data *d)
> +{
> + /* generic irq handling */
> +}
> +
> +static void gsc_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
> +{
> + /* generic irq handling */
> +} > +
> +static struct irq_chip gsc_irq_chip = {
> + .name = "gsc_irq_chip",
> + .irq_mask = gsc_irq_mask,
> + .irq_unmask = gsc_irq_unmask,
> +};
> +
> +static int gsc_irq_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int irq)
I am not insisting but we tend to use i915 for the variable name instead
of dev_priv since some time back.
> +{
> + irq_set_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &gsc_irq_chip,
> + handle_simple_irq, "gsc_irq_handler");
> +
> + return irq_set_chip_data(irq, dev_priv);
I am not familiar with this interrupt scheme - does dev_priv get used at
all by handle_simple_irq, or anyone, after being set here?
> +}
> +
> +struct intel_gsc_def {
> + const char *name;
> + const unsigned long bar;
Unusual, why const out of curiosity? And is it "bar" or "base" would be
more accurate?
> + size_t bar_size;
> +};
> +
> +/* gscfi (graphics system controller firmware interface) resources */
> +static const struct intel_gsc_def intel_gsc_def_dg1[] = {
> + {
> + },
Maybe put a comment in this empty element like "/* HECI1 not yet
implemented. */"?
> + {
> + .name = "mei-gscfi",
> + .bar = GSC_DG1_HECI2_BASE,
> + .bar_size = GSC_BAR_LENGTH,
> + }
> +};
> +
> +static void intel_gsc_release_dev(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct auxiliary_device *aux_dev = to_auxiliary_dev(dev);
> + struct mei_aux_device *adev = auxiliary_dev_to_mei_aux_dev(aux_dev);
> +
> + kfree(adev);
> +}
> +
> +static void intel_gsc_destroy_one(struct intel_gsc_intf *intf)
> +{
> + if (intf->adev) {
> + auxiliary_device_delete(&intf->adev->aux_dev);
> + auxiliary_device_uninit(&intf->adev->aux_dev);
> + intf->adev = NULL;
> + }
> + if (intf->irq >= 0)
> + irq_free_desc(intf->irq);
> + intf->irq = -1;
> +}
> +
> +static void intel_gsc_init_one(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> + struct intel_gsc_intf *intf,
> + unsigned int intf_id)
Could pass in intel_gsc instead of dev_priv to better match with
intel_gsc prefix, but no big deal.
> +{
> + struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev_priv->drm.dev);
> + struct mei_aux_device *adev;
> + struct auxiliary_device *aux_dev;
> + const struct intel_gsc_def *def;
> + int ret;
> +
> + intf->irq = -1;
> + intf->id = intf_id;
> +
> + if (intf_id == 0 && !HAS_HECI_PXP(dev_priv))
> + return;
Isn't inf_id == 0 always a bug with this patch, regardless of
HAS_HECI_PXP, since the support is incomplete in this patch? If so I'd
be more comfortable with a plain drm_WARN_ON_ONCE(intf_id == 0).
> +
> + def = &intel_gsc_def_dg1[intf_id];
> +
> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "init gsc one with id %d\n", intf_id);
Meh, too much looks like a during development aid.
> + intf->irq = irq_alloc_desc(0);
> + if (intf->irq < 0) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "gsc irq error %d\n", intf->irq);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + ret = gsc_irq_init(dev_priv, intf->irq);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "gsc irq init failed %d\n", ret);
> + goto fail;
> + }
> +
> + adev = kzalloc(sizeof(*adev), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!adev)
> + goto fail;
> +
> + adev->irq = intf->irq;
> + adev->bar.parent = &pdev->resource[0];
> + adev->bar.start = def->bar + pdev->resource[0].start;
> + adev->bar.end = adev->bar.start + def->bar_size - 1;
> + adev->bar.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM;
> + adev->bar.desc = IORES_DESC_NONE;
> +
> + aux_dev = &adev->aux_dev;
> + aux_dev->name = def->name;
> + aux_dev->id = (pci_domain_nr(pdev->bus) << 16) |
> + PCI_DEVID(pdev->bus->number, pdev->devfn);
> + aux_dev->dev.parent = &pdev->dev;
> + aux_dev->dev.release = intel_gsc_release_dev;
> +
> + ret = auxiliary_device_init(aux_dev);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "gsc aux init failed %d\n", ret);
> + kfree(adev);
> + goto fail;
> + }
> +
> + ret = auxiliary_device_add(aux_dev);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "gsc aux add failed %d\n", ret);
> + /* adev will be freed with the put_device() and .release sequence */
For things which fail but do not prevent driver loading and operating
otherwise correctly I'd suggest drm_warn throughout but maybe it is just me.
> + auxiliary_device_uninit(aux_dev);
> + goto fail;
> + }
> + intf->adev = adev;
> +
> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "gsc init one done\n");
> + return;
> +fail:
> + intel_gsc_destroy_one(intf);
Error handling is a bit meh but looks correct. Like you could avoid
separate free's on the error paths by doing onion unwind, or even full
onion unwind instead of conditional teardown in intel_gsc_destroy_one.
Not asking for it, just commenting.
> +}
> +
> +static void intel_gsc_irq_handler(struct intel_gt *gt, unsigned int intf_id)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (intf_id >= INTEL_GSC_NUM_INTERFACES)
> + return;
Is this worthy of a WARN_ON or drm_warn? (ratelimited I suppose) Because
it would be either bad hardware or a bad driver error to see the
interrupt with wrong interface, no?
> +
> + if (!HAS_HECI_GSC(gt->i915))
> + return;
Likewise?
> +
> + if (gt->gsc.intf[intf_id].irq <= 0) {
> + DRM_ERROR_RATELIMITED("error handling GSC irq: irq not set");
Like this, but use logging functions which say which device please.
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + ret = generic_handle_irq(gt->gsc.intf[intf_id].irq);
> + if (ret)
> + DRM_ERROR_RATELIMITED("error handling GSC irq: %d\n", ret);
> +}
> +
> +void gsc_irq_handler(struct intel_gt *gt, u32 iir)
> +{
> + if (iir & GSC_IRQ_INTF(0))
> + intel_gsc_irq_handler(gt, 0);
> + if (iir & GSC_IRQ_INTF(1))
> + intel_gsc_irq_handler(gt, 1);
> +}
> +
> +void intel_gsc_init(struct intel_gsc *gsc, struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
Here you don't need to pass in dev_priv since you can get it with
container_of and gt->i915 but up to you, no big deal.
> +{
> + unsigned int i;
> +
> + if (!HAS_HECI_GSC(dev_priv))
> + return;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < INTEL_GSC_NUM_INTERFACES; i++)
> + intel_gsc_init_one(dev_priv, &gsc->intf[i], i);
> +}
> +
> +void intel_gsc_fini(struct intel_gsc *gsc)
> +{
> + struct intel_gt *gt = gsc_to_gt(gsc);
> + unsigned int i;
> +
> + if (!HAS_HECI_GSC(gt->i915))
> + return;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < INTEL_GSC_NUM_INTERFACES; i++)
> + intel_gsc_destroy_one(&gsc->intf[i]);
> +}
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..67cb2a75f839
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gsc.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT */
> +/*
> + * Copyright(c) 2019-2022, Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + */
> +#ifndef __INTEL_GSC_DEV_H__
> +#define __INTEL_GSC_DEV_H__
> +
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +
> +struct drm_i915_private;
> +struct intel_gt;
> +struct mei_aux_device;
> +
> +#define INTEL_GSC_NUM_INTERFACES 2
> +/*
> + * The HECI1 bit corresponds to bit15 and HECI2 to bit14.
> + * The reason for this is to allow growth for more interfaces in the future.
> + */
> +#define GSC_IRQ_INTF(_x) BIT(15 - (_x))
> +
> +/**
> + * struct intel_gsc - graphics security controller
> + * @intf : gsc interface
> + */
> +struct intel_gsc {
> + struct intel_gsc_intf {
> + struct mei_aux_device *adev;
> + int irq;
> + unsigned int id;
> + } intf[INTEL_GSC_NUM_INTERFACES];
> +};
> +
> +void intel_gsc_init(struct intel_gsc *gsc, struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> +void intel_gsc_fini(struct intel_gsc *gsc);
> +void gsc_irq_handler(struct intel_gt *gt, u32 iir);
Why not have consistent prefix on all exported functions?
> +
> +#endif /* __INTEL_GSC_DEV_H__ */
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> index e8403fa53909..18961d154956 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> @@ -446,6 +446,8 @@ void intel_gt_chipset_flush(struct intel_gt *gt)
>
> void intel_gt_driver_register(struct intel_gt *gt)
> {
> + intel_gsc_init(>->gsc, gt->i915);
> +
> intel_rps_driver_register(>->rps);
>
> intel_gt_debugfs_register(gt);
> @@ -766,6 +768,7 @@ void intel_gt_driver_unregister(struct intel_gt *gt)
> intel_wakeref_t wakeref;
>
> intel_rps_driver_unregister(>->rps);
> + intel_gsc_fini(>->gsc);
>
> intel_pxp_fini(>->pxp);
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h
> index 2dad46c3eff2..6ba817c02baa 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h
> @@ -34,6 +34,11 @@ static inline struct intel_gt *huc_to_gt(struct intel_huc *huc)
> return container_of(huc, struct intel_gt, uc.huc);
> }
>
> +static inline struct intel_gt *gsc_to_gt(struct intel_gsc *gsc)
> +{
> + return container_of(gsc, struct intel_gt, gsc);
> +}
> +
> void intel_gt_init_early(struct intel_gt *gt, struct drm_i915_private *i915);
> void __intel_gt_init_early(struct intel_gt *gt, struct drm_i915_private *i915);
> int intel_gt_assign_ggtt(struct intel_gt *gt);
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_irq.c
> index 983264e10e0a..d36f919bbdf5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_irq.c
> @@ -68,6 +68,9 @@ gen11_other_irq_handler(struct intel_gt *gt, const u8 instance,
> if (instance == OTHER_KCR_INSTANCE)
> return intel_pxp_irq_handler(>->pxp, iir);
>
> + if (instance == OTHER_GSC_INSTANCE)
> + return gsc_irq_handler(gt, iir);
> +
> WARN_ONCE(1, "unhandled other interrupt instance=0x%x, iir=0x%x\n",
> instance, iir);
Digression - it would be nice to be able to report unhandled iir bits
here but all handlers return void so refactoring would be needed.
> }
> @@ -182,6 +185,8 @@ void gen11_gt_irq_reset(struct intel_gt *gt)
> /* Disable RCS, BCS, VCS and VECS class engines. */
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_RENDER_COPY_INTR_ENABLE, 0);
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_VCS_VECS_INTR_ENABLE, 0);
> + if (HAS_HECI_GSC(gt->i915))
> + intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_GUNIT_CSME_INTR_ENABLE, 0);
>
> /* Restore masks irqs on RCS, BCS, VCS and VECS engines. */
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_RCS0_RSVD_INTR_MASK, ~0);
> @@ -195,6 +200,8 @@ void gen11_gt_irq_reset(struct intel_gt *gt)
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_VECS0_VECS1_INTR_MASK, ~0);
> if (HAS_ENGINE(gt, VECS2) || HAS_ENGINE(gt, VECS3))
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN12_VECS2_VECS3_INTR_MASK, ~0);
> + if (HAS_HECI_GSC(gt->i915))
> + intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_GUNIT_CSME_INTR_MASK, ~0);
>
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_GPM_WGBOXPERF_INTR_ENABLE, 0);
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_GPM_WGBOXPERF_INTR_MASK, ~0);
> @@ -209,6 +216,7 @@ void gen11_gt_irq_postinstall(struct intel_gt *gt)
> {
> struct intel_uncore *uncore = gt->uncore;
> u32 irqs = GT_RENDER_USER_INTERRUPT;
> + const u32 gsc_mask = GSC_IRQ_INTF(0) | GSC_IRQ_INTF(1);
Why enable the one which is not supported by the patch? No harm doing it?
> u32 dmask;
> u32 smask;
>
> @@ -225,6 +233,9 @@ void gen11_gt_irq_postinstall(struct intel_gt *gt)
> /* Enable RCS, BCS, VCS and VECS class interrupts. */
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_RENDER_COPY_INTR_ENABLE, dmask);
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_VCS_VECS_INTR_ENABLE, dmask);
> + if (HAS_HECI_GSC(gt->i915))
> + intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_GUNIT_CSME_INTR_ENABLE,
> + gsc_mask);
>
> /* Unmask irqs on RCS, BCS, VCS and VECS engines. */
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_RCS0_RSVD_INTR_MASK, ~smask);
> @@ -238,6 +249,8 @@ void gen11_gt_irq_postinstall(struct intel_gt *gt)
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_VECS0_VECS1_INTR_MASK, ~dmask);
> if (HAS_ENGINE(gt, VECS2) || HAS_ENGINE(gt, VECS3))
> intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN12_VECS2_VECS3_INTR_MASK, ~dmask);
> + if (HAS_HECI_GSC(gt->i915))
> + intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN11_GUNIT_CSME_INTR_MASK, 0);
> /*
> * RPS interrupts will get enabled/disabled on demand when RPS itself
> * is enabled/disabled.
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_regs.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_regs.h
> index a6f0220c2e9f..427f91900afc 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_regs.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_regs.h
> @@ -944,6 +944,7 @@ enum {
> #define OTHER_GUC_INSTANCE 0
> #define OTHER_GTPM_INSTANCE 1
> #define OTHER_KCR_INSTANCE 4
> +#define OTHER_GSC_INSTANCE 6
>
> #define GEN11_INTR_IDENTITY_REG(x) _MMIO(0x190060 + ((x) * 4))
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
> index f20687796490..5556d55f76ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
> #include <linux/workqueue.h>
>
> #include "uc/intel_uc.h"
> +#include "intel_gsc.h"
>
> #include "i915_vma.h"
> #include "intel_engine_types.h"
> @@ -72,6 +73,7 @@ struct intel_gt {
> struct i915_ggtt *ggtt;
>
> struct intel_uc uc;
> + struct intel_gsc gsc;
>
> struct mutex tlb_invalidate_lock;
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> index 4f057a45654a..b41871abe776 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> @@ -1444,6 +1444,14 @@ IS_SUBPLATFORM(const struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>
> #define HAS_DMC(dev_priv) (INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->display.has_dmc)
>
> +#define HAS_HECI_PXP(dev_priv) \
> + (INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->has_heci_pxp)
> +
> +#define HAS_HECI_GSCFI(dev_priv) \
> + (INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->has_heci_gscfi)
> +
> +#define HAS_HECI_GSC(dev_priv) (HAS_HECI_PXP(dev_priv) || HAS_HECI_GSCFI(dev_priv))
> +
> #define HAS_MSO(i915) (DISPLAY_VER(i915) >= 12)
>
> #define HAS_RUNTIME_PM(dev_priv) (INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->has_runtime_pm)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
> index 467252f885c2..8f608b03d30b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
> @@ -900,7 +900,8 @@ static const struct intel_device_info rkl_info = {
> .has_llc = 0, \
> .has_pxp = 0, \
> .has_snoop = 1, \
> - .is_dgfx = 1
> + .is_dgfx = 1, \
> + .has_heci_gscfi = 1
>
> static const struct intel_device_info dg1_info = {
> GEN12_FEATURES,
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> index ca6adfc234c0..e74934255198 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> @@ -974,6 +974,8 @@
> #define GEN11_VEBOX2_RING_BASE 0x1d8000
> #define XEHP_VEBOX3_RING_BASE 0x1e8000
> #define XEHP_VEBOX4_RING_BASE 0x1f8000
> +#define GSC_DG1_HECI1_BASE 0x00258000
> +#define GSC_DG1_HECI2_BASE 0x00259000
> #define BLT_RING_BASE 0x22000
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.h
> index 27dcfe6f2429..fa75f464cb01 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.h
> @@ -135,6 +135,8 @@ enum intel_ppgtt_type {
> func(has_reset_engine); \
> func(has_global_mocs); \
> func(has_gt_uc); \
> + func(has_heci_pxp); \
Presumably this will be used soon? (And the variety of HAS_ macros.)
> + func(has_heci_gscfi); \
> func(has_guc_deprivilege); \
> func(has_l3_dpf); \
> func(has_llc); \
> diff --git a/include/linux/mei_aux.h b/include/linux/mei_aux.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..587f25128848
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/mei_aux.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2022, Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + */
> +#ifndef _LINUX_MEI_AUX_H
> +#define _LINUX_MEI_AUX_H
> +
> +#include <linux/auxiliary_bus.h>
> +
> +struct mei_aux_device {
> + struct auxiliary_device aux_dev;
> + int irq;
> + struct resource bar;
> +};
> +
> +#define auxiliary_dev_to_mei_aux_dev(auxiliary_dev) \
> + container_of(auxiliary_dev, struct mei_aux_device, aux_dev)
> +
> +#endif /* _LINUX_MEI_AUX_H */
In summary I think prefix on the exported function and
drm_err_ratelimited were the only comments which need action. The rest
were either questions of suggestions on how to polish it a bit more so
it aligns better with established i915 patterns.
Regards,
Tvrtko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists