| 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: <45616b21-ed70-96a3-b17d-0ee765383bc7@amd.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 09:53:11 +0530
From: "M K, Muralidhara" <muralimk@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mchehab@...nel.org, Muralidhara M K <muralidhara.mk@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] EDAC/amd64: Add Family 19h Models 90h ~ 9fh
enumeration support
Hi Boris,
On 10/27/2023 8:15 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 05:14:55AM +0000, Muralidhara M K wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] EDAC/amd64: Add Family 19h Models 90h ~ 9fh enumeration support
>
> "Add support for family 0x19, models 0x90-9f devices"
>
>> From: Muralidhara M K <muralidhara.mk@....com>
>>
>> AMD Models 90h-9fh are APUs, They have built-in HBM3 memory.
>
> s/,/./
>
>> ECC support is enabled by default.
>>
>> APU models have a single Data Fabric (DF) per Package. Each DF is
>> visible to the OS in the same way as chiplet-based systems like
>> Rome and later. However, the Unified Memory Controllers (UMCs) are
>
> s/Rome/Zen2 CPUs/
>
>> arranged in the same way as GPU-based MI200 devices rather than
>> CPU-based systems.
>>
>> So, use the gpu_ops for enumeration and adds a few fixups to
>> support enumeration of nodes and memory topology.
>
> Do not talk about *what* the patch is doing in the commit message - that
> should be obvious from the diff itself. Rather, concentrate on the *why*
> it needs to be done.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Muralidhara M K <muralidhara.mk@....com>
>> ---
>> drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c b/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c
>> index 9b6642d00871..82302393894c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c
>> +++ b/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c
>> @@ -996,12 +996,19 @@ static struct local_node_map {
>> #define LNTM_NODE_COUNT GENMASK(27, 16)
>> #define LNTM_BASE_NODE_ID GENMASK(11, 0)
>>
>> -static int gpu_get_node_map(void)
>> +static int gpu_get_node_map(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
>> {
>> struct pci_dev *pdev;
>> int ret;
>> u32 tmp;
>>
>> + /* Mapping of nodes from hardware-provided AMD Node ID to a Linux logical
>
> verify_comment_style: WARNING: Multi-line comment needs to start text on the second line:
> [+ /* Mapping of nodes from hardware-provided AMD Node ID to a Linux logical]
>
>> + * one is applicable for MI200 models.
>> + * Therefore return early for other heterogeneous systems.
>> + */
>> + if (pvt->F3->device != PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_MI200_DF_F3)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> /*
>> * Node ID 0 is reserved for CPUs.
>> * Therefore, a non-zero Node ID means we've already cached the values.
>> @@ -3851,7 +3858,7 @@ static void gpu_init_csrows(struct mem_ctl_info *mci)
>>
>> dimm->nr_pages = gpu_get_csrow_nr_pages(pvt, umc, cs);
>> dimm->edac_mode = EDAC_SECDED;
>> - dimm->mtype = MEM_HBM2;
>> + dimm->mtype = pvt->dram_type;
>> dimm->dtype = DEV_X16;
>> dimm->grain = 64;
>> }
>> @@ -3880,6 +3887,9 @@ static bool gpu_ecc_enabled(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
>> return true;
>> }
>>
>> +/* Base address used for channels selection on MI200 GPUs */
>> +static u32 gpu_umc_base = 0x50000;
>
> That gpu_umc_base assignment can happen in per_family_init() too.
>
Sure. will modify
>> +
>> static inline u32 gpu_get_umc_base(u8 umc, u8 channel)
>> {
>> /*
>> @@ -3893,13 +3903,33 @@ static inline u32 gpu_get_umc_base(u8 umc, u8 channel)
>> * On GPU nodes channels are selected in 3rd nibble
>> * HBM chX[3:0]= [Y ]5X[3:0]000;
>> * HBM chX[7:4]= [Y+1]5X[3:0]000
>> + *
>> + * On MI300 APU nodes, same as GPU nodes but channels are selected
>> + * in the base address of 0x90000
>> */
>> umc *= 2;
>>
>> if (channel >= 4)
>> umc++;
>>
>> - return 0x50000 + (umc << 20) + ((channel % 4) << 12);
>> + return gpu_umc_base + (umc << 20) + ((channel % 4) << 12);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void gpu_determine_memory_type(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
>> +{
>> + if (pvt->fam == 0x19) {
>> + switch (pvt->model) {
>> + case 0x30 ... 0x3F:
>> + pvt->dram_type = MEM_HBM2;
>> + break;
>> + case 0x90 ... 0x9F:
>> + pvt->dram_type = MEM_HBM3;
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + edac_dbg(1, " MEM type: %s\n", edac_mem_types[pvt->dram_type]);
>
> That whole assignment can happen in per_family_init() - no need for that
> function here.
>
Thanks. got it
>> static void gpu_read_mc_regs(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
>> @@ -3960,7 +3990,7 @@ static int gpu_hw_info_get(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
>> {
>> int ret;
>>
>> - ret = gpu_get_node_map();
>> + ret = gpu_get_node_map(pvt);
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>>
>> @@ -3971,6 +4001,7 @@ static int gpu_hw_info_get(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
>> gpu_prep_chip_selects(pvt);
>> gpu_read_base_mask(pvt);
>> gpu_read_mc_regs(pvt);
>> + gpu_determine_memory_type(pvt);
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>> @@ -4142,6 +4173,12 @@ static int per_family_init(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
>> pvt->ctl_name = "F19h_M70h";
>> pvt->flags.zn_regs_v2 = 1;
>> break;
>> + case 0x90 ... 0x9f:
>> + pvt->ctl_name = "F19h_M90h";
>> + pvt->max_mcs = 4;
>> + gpu_umc_base = 0x90000;
>> + pvt->ops = &gpu_ops;
>> + break;
>> case 0xa0 ... 0xaf:
>> pvt->ctl_name = "F19h_MA0h";
>> pvt->max_mcs = 12;
>> @@ -4180,23 +4217,31 @@ static const struct attribute_group *amd64_edac_attr_groups[] = {
>> NULL
>> };
>>
>> +/*
>> + * For Heterogeneous and APU models EDAC CHIP_SELECT and CHANNEL layers
>
> s/Heterogeneous/heterogeneous/
>
>> + * should be swapped to fit into the layers.
>> + */
>> +static unsigned int get_layer_size(struct amd64_pvt *pvt, u8 layer)
>> +{
>> + bool is_gpu = (pvt->ops == &gpu_ops);
>> +
>> + if (!layer)
>> + return is_gpu ? pvt->max_mcs : pvt->csels[0].b_cnt;
>> +
>> + return is_gpu ? pvt->csels[0].b_cnt : pvt->max_mcs;
>
> Balance that for better readability:
>
> if (!layer)
> return is_gpu ? pvt->max_mcs
> : pvt->csels[0].b_cnt;
> else
> return is_gpu ? pvt->csels[0].b_cnt
> : pvt->max_mcs;
>
>
Sure understood. will modify
> Thx.
>
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
>
> https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists