From 91e4611ddc97c13ee66edfcd94974e6450d03726 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ben Skeggs Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 14:41:26 +1000 Subject: drm/gk104-/fb/ram: perform certain steps only when bios data differs Awful, awful. But, on the GK106 I have, some upcoming patches show that this is actually necessary after all. Signed-off-by: Ben Skeggs --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/fb/ramnve0.c | 53 +++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau') diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/fb/ramnve0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/fb/ramnve0.c index 6af51ac3f0b4..afde4c1d6a4b 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/fb/ramnve0.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/fb/ramnve0.c @@ -43,14 +43,6 @@ #include "ramfuc.h" -/* binary driver only executes this path if the condition (a) is true - * for any configuration (combination of rammap+ramcfg+timing) that - * can be reached on a given card. for now, we will execute the branch - * unconditionally in the hope that a "false everywhere" in the bios - * tables doesn't actually mean "don't touch this". - */ -#define NOTE00(a) 1 - struct nve0_ramfuc { struct ramfuc base; @@ -141,6 +133,7 @@ struct nve0_ram { u32 pmask; u32 pnuts; + struct nvbios_ramcfg diff; int from; int mode; int N1, fN1, M1, P1; @@ -481,7 +474,7 @@ nve0_ram_calc_gddr5(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, u32 freq) ram_mask(fuc, 0x10f2e8, 0xffffffff, next->bios.timing[9]); data = mask = 0x00000000; - if (NOTE00(ramcfg_08_20)) { + if (ram->diff.ramcfg_11_08_20) { if (next->bios.ramcfg_11_08_20) data |= 0x01000000; mask |= 0x01000000; @@ -489,11 +482,11 @@ nve0_ram_calc_gddr5(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, u32 freq) ram_mask(fuc, 0x10f200, mask, data); data = mask = 0x00000000; - if (NOTE00(ramcfg_02_03 != 0)) { + if (ram->diff.ramcfg_11_02_03) { data |= next->bios.ramcfg_11_02_03 << 8; mask |= 0x00000300; } - if (NOTE00(ramcfg_01_10)) { + if (ram->diff.ramcfg_11_01_10) { if (next->bios.ramcfg_11_01_10) data |= 0x70000000; mask |= 0x70000000; @@ -501,11 +494,11 @@ nve0_ram_calc_gddr5(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, u32 freq) ram_mask(fuc, 0x10f604, mask, data); data = mask = 0x00000000; - if (NOTE00(timing_30_07 != 0)) { + if (ram->diff.timing_20_30_07) { data |= next->bios.timing_20_30_07 << 28; mask |= 0x70000000; } - if (NOTE00(ramcfg_01_01)) { + if (ram->diff.ramcfg_11_01_01) { if (next->bios.ramcfg_11_01_01) data |= 0x00000100; mask |= 0x00000100; @@ -513,11 +506,11 @@ nve0_ram_calc_gddr5(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, u32 freq) ram_mask(fuc, 0x10f614, mask, data); data = mask = 0x00000000; - if (NOTE00(timing_30_07 != 0)) { + if (ram->diff.timing_20_30_07) { data |= next->bios.timing_20_30_07 << 28; mask |= 0x70000000; } - if (NOTE00(ramcfg_01_02)) { + if (ram->diff.ramcfg_11_01_02) { if (next->bios.ramcfg_11_01_02) data |= 0x00000100; mask |= 0x00000100; @@ -551,11 +544,11 @@ nve0_ram_calc_gddr5(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, u32 freq) ram_wr32(fuc, 0x10f870, 0x11111111 * next->bios.ramcfg_11_03_0f); data = mask = 0x00000000; - if (NOTE00(ramcfg_02_03 != 0)) { + if (ram->diff.ramcfg_11_02_03) { data |= next->bios.ramcfg_11_02_03; mask |= 0x00000003; } - if (NOTE00(ramcfg_01_10)) { + if (ram->diff.ramcfg_11_01_10) { if (next->bios.ramcfg_11_01_10) data |= 0x00000004; mask |= 0x00000004; @@ -1291,12 +1284,16 @@ nve0_ram_ctor_data(struct nve0_ram *ram, u8 ramcfg, int i) struct nouveau_fb *pfb = (void *)nv_object(ram)->parent; struct nouveau_bios *bios = nouveau_bios(pfb); struct nouveau_ram_data *cfg; + struct nvbios_ramcfg *d = &ram->diff; + struct nvbios_ramcfg *p, *n; u8 ver, hdr, cnt, len; u32 data; int ret; if (!(cfg = kmalloc(sizeof(*cfg), GFP_KERNEL))) return -ENOMEM; + p = &list_last_entry(&ram->cfg, typeof(*cfg), head)->bios; + n = &cfg->bios; /* memory config data for a range of target frequencies */ data = nvbios_rammapEp(bios, i, &ver, &hdr, &cnt, &len, &cfg->bios); @@ -1325,7 +1322,15 @@ nve0_ram_ctor_data(struct nve0_ram *ram, u8 ramcfg, int i) } list_add_tail(&cfg->head, &ram->cfg); - ret = 0; + if (ret = 0, i == 0) + goto done; + + d->ramcfg_11_01_01 |= p->ramcfg_11_01_01 != n->ramcfg_11_01_01; + d->ramcfg_11_01_02 |= p->ramcfg_11_01_02 != n->ramcfg_11_01_02; + d->ramcfg_11_01_10 |= p->ramcfg_11_01_10 != n->ramcfg_11_01_10; + d->ramcfg_11_02_03 |= p->ramcfg_11_02_03 != n->ramcfg_11_02_03; + d->ramcfg_11_08_20 |= p->ramcfg_11_08_20 != n->ramcfg_11_08_20; + d->timing_20_30_07 |= p->timing_20_30_07 != n->timing_20_30_07; done: if (ret) kfree(cfg); @@ -1397,7 +1402,17 @@ nve0_ram_ctor(struct nouveau_object *parent, struct nouveau_object *engine, } } - /* parse ramcfg data for all possible target frequencies */ + /* parse bios data for all rammap table entries up-front, and + * build information on whether certain fields differ between + * any of the entries. + * + * the binary driver appears to completely ignore some fields + * when all entries contain the same value. at first, it was + * hoped that these were mere optimisations and the bios init + * tables had configured as per the values here, but there is + * evidence now to suggest that this isn't the case and we do + * need to treat this condition as a "don't touch" indicator. + */ for (i = 0; !ret; i++) { ret = nve0_ram_ctor_data(ram, ramcfg, i); if (ret && ret != -ENOENT) { -- cgit v1.2.3