by Rob Clark

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/msm/adreno: Split up giant device table

On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 4:29 AM Konrad Dybcio <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/5/23 23:03, Rob Clark wrote:
> > From: Rob Clark <[email protected]>
> >
> > Split into a separate table per generation, in preparation to move each
> > gen's device table to it's own file.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c
> > index 41b13dec9bef..36392801f929 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c
> > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ bool allow_vram_carveout = false;
> > MODULE_PARM_DESC(allow_vram_carveout, "Allow using VRAM Carveout, in place of IOMMU");
> > module_param_named(allow_vram_carveout, allow_vram_carveout, bool, 0600);
> >
> > -static const struct adreno_info gpulist[] = {
> > +static const struct adreno_info a2xx_gpus[] = {
> > {
> > .chip_ids = ADRENO_CHIP_IDS(0x02000000),
> > .family = ADRENO_2XX_GEN1,
> > @@ -55,6 +55,12 @@ static const struct adreno_info gpulist[] = {
> > .inactive_period = DRM_MSM_INACTIVE_PERIOD,
> > .init = a2xx_gpu_init,
> > }, {
> > + /* sentinal */
> sentinel?
>
> > + }
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct adreno_info a3xx_gpus[] = {
> > + {
> > .chip_ids = ADRENO_CHIP_IDS(
> > 0x03000512,
> > 0x03000520
> > @@ -110,6 +116,12 @@ static const struct adreno_info gpulist[] = {
> > .inactive_period = DRM_MSM_INACTIVE_PERIOD,
> > .init = a3xx_gpu_init,
> > }, {
> > + /* sentinal */
> > + }
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct adreno_info a4xx_gpus[] = {
> > + {
> > .chip_ids = ADRENO_CHIP_IDS(0x04000500),
> > .family = ADRENO_4XX,
> > .revn = 405,
> > @@ -143,6 +155,12 @@ static const struct adreno_info gpulist[] = {
> > .inactive_period = DRM_MSM_INACTIVE_PERIOD,
> > .init = a4xx_gpu_init,
> > }, {
> > + /* sentinal */
> > + }
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct adreno_info a5xx_gpus[] = {
> > + {
> > .chip_ids = ADRENO_CHIP_IDS(0x05000600),
> > .family = ADRENO_5XX,
> > .revn = 506,
> > @@ -268,6 +286,12 @@ static const struct adreno_info gpulist[] = {
> > .init = a5xx_gpu_init,
> > .zapfw = "a540_zap.mdt",
> > }, {
> > + /* sentinal */
> > + }
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct adreno_info a6xx_gpus[] = {
> > + {
> > .chip_ids = ADRENO_CHIP_IDS(0x06010000),
> > .family = ADRENO_6XX_GEN1,
> > .revn = 610,
> > @@ -493,6 +517,12 @@ static const struct adreno_info gpulist[] = {
> > .hwcg = a690_hwcg,
> > .address_space_size = SZ_16G,
> > }, {
> > + /* sentinal */
> > + }
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct adreno_info a7xx_gpus[] = {
> > + {
> > .chip_ids = ADRENO_CHIP_IDS(0x07030001),
> > .family = ADRENO_7XX_GEN1,
> > .fw = {
> > @@ -522,7 +552,18 @@ static const struct adreno_info gpulist[] = {
> > .zapfw = "a740_zap.mdt",
> > .hwcg = a740_hwcg,
> > .address_space_size = SZ_16G,
> > - },
> > + }, {
> > + /* sentinal */
> > + }
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct adreno_info *gpulist[] = {
> > + a2xx_gpus,
> > + a3xx_gpus,
> > + a4xx_gpus,
> > + a5xx_gpus,
> > + a6xx_gpus,
> > + a7xx_gpus,
> > };
> >
> > MODULE_FIRMWARE("qcom/a300_pm4.fw");
> > @@ -557,12 +598,14 @@ static const struct adreno_info *adreno_info(uint32_t chip_id)
> > {
> > /* identify gpu: */
> > for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(gpulist); i++) {
> > - const struct adreno_info *info = &gpulist[i];
> > - if (info->machine && !of_machine_is_compatible(info->machine))
> > - continue;
> > - for (int j = 0; info->chip_ids[j]; j++)
> I'm not sure using sentinels here is a good idea, it adds a
> whole lot of stack size. Perhaps gpulist could be a struct
> of array pointers and an array of sizes?

I guess you meant text size..

But with 30 devices currently, that array would be (30 + 7) * 8 = 296
bytes.. each sentinel is ~112 bytes (and arguably we could move a bit
more out of adreno_info). So it isn't that big of a difference.

Being able to have aNxx_info subclass adreno_effort might be a more
compelling reason to go for an array of pointers. I'd have to see how
awkward that looks.

BR,
-R