On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 04:30:05PM -0700, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
> The only difference between the ADL S and P GuC FWs is the HWConfig
> support. ADL-N does not support HWConfig, so we should use the same
> binary as ADL-S, otherwise the GuC might attempt to fetch a config
> table that does not exist. ADL-N is internally identified as an ADL-P,
> so we need to special-case it in the FW selection code.
>
> Fixes: 7e28d0b26759 ("drm/i915/adl-n: Enable ADL-N platform")
> Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com>
> Cc: Tejas Upadhyay <tejas.upadh...@intel.com>
> Cc: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.sriva...@intel.com>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com>
Would the config table still get used somehow even though we return
false for ADL-N in has_table()?
Even if it couldn't be used, this change makes the behavior more clear
and explicit.
Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.ro...@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc_fw.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc_fw.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc_fw.c
> index d2c5c9367cc4..ef2d10184ee2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc_fw.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc_fw.c
> @@ -162,6 +162,15 @@ __uc_fw_auto_select(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> struct intel_uc_fw *uc_fw)
> u8 rev = INTEL_REVID(i915);
> int i;
>
> + /*
> + * The only difference between the ADL GuC FWs is the HWConfig support.
> + * ADL-N does not support HWConfig, so we should use the same binary as
> + * ADL-S, otherwise the GuC might attempt to fetch a config table that
> + * does not exist.
> + */
> + if (IS_ADLP_N(i915))
> + p = INTEL_ALDERLAKE_S;
> +
> GEM_BUG_ON(uc_fw->type >= ARRAY_SIZE(blobs_all));
> fw_blobs = blobs_all[uc_fw->type].blobs;
> fw_count = blobs_all[uc_fw->type].count;
> --
> 2.25.1
>
--
Matt Roper
Graphics Software Engineer
VTT-OSGC Platform Enablement
Intel Corporation
