Hi Neil,

On 28/08/2019 12:28, Neil Armstrong wrote:

Hi Robin,

On 31/05/2019 15:47, Robin Murphy wrote:

quoted

On 31/05/2019 13:04, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 29 May 2019 at 19:38, Robin Murphy [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 29/05/2019 16:09, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 18:11, Clément Péron [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

[snip]

quoted

[  345.204813] panfrost 1800000.gpu: mmu irq status=1
[  345.209617] panfrost 1800000.gpu: Unhandled Page fault in AS0 at VA
0x0000000002400400

   From what I can see here, 0x0000000002400400 points to the first byte
of the first submitted job descriptor.

So mapping buffers for the GPU doesn't seem to be working at all on
64-bit T-760.

Steven, Robin, do you have any idea of why this could be?

I tried rolling back to the old panfrost/nondrm shim, and it works fine
with kbase, and I also found that T-820 falls over in the exact same
manner, so the fact that it seemed to be common to the smaller 33-bit
designs rather than anything to do with the other
job_descriptor_size/v4/v5 complication turned out to be telling.

Is this complication something you can explain? I don't know what v4
and v5 are meant here.

I was alluding to BASE_HW_FEATURE_V4, which I believe refers to the Midgard architecture version - the older versions implemented by T6xx and T720 seem to be collectively treated as "v4", while T760 and T8xx would effectively be "v5".

quoted

quoted

[ as an aside, are 64-bit jobs actually known not to work on v4 GPUs, or
is it just that nobody's yet observed a 64-bit blob driving one? ]

I'm looking right now at getting Panfrost working on T720 with 64-bit
descriptors, with the ultimate goal of making Panfrost
64-bit-descriptor only so we can have a single build of Mesa in
distros.

Cool, I'll keep an eye out, and hope that it might be enough for T620 on Juno, too :)

quoted

quoted

Long story short, it appears that 'Mali LPAE' is also lacking the start
level notion of VMSA, and expects a full 4-level table even for <40 bits
when level 0 effectively redundant. Thus walking the 3-level table that
io-pgtable comes back with ends up going wildly wrong. The hack below
seems to do the job for me; if Clément can confirm (on T-720 you'll
still need the userspace hack to force 32-bit jobs as well) then I think
I'll cook up a proper refactoring of the allocator to put things right.

Mmaps seem to work with this patch, thanks.

The main complication I'm facing right now seems to be that the SFBD
descriptor on T720 seems to be different from the one we already had
(tested on T6xx?).

OK - with the 32-bit hack pointed to up-thread, a quick kmscube test gave me the impression that T720 works fine, but on closer inspection some parts of glmark2 do seem to go a bit wonky (although I suspect at least some of it is just down to the FPGA setup being both very slow and lacking in memory bandwidth), and the "nv12-1img" mode of kmscube turns out to render in some delightfully wrong colours.

I'll try to get a 'proper' version of the io-pgtable patch posted soon.

I'm trying to collect all the fixes needed to make T820 work again, and
I was wondering if you finally have a proper patch for this and "cfg->ias > 48"
hack ? Or one I can test ?

I do have a handful of io-pgtable patches written up and ready to go, 
I'm just treading carefully and waiting for the internal approval box to 
be ticked before I share anything :(

Robin.

Thanks,
Neil

quoted

Thanks,
Robin.

quoted

Cheers,

Tomeu

quoted

Robin.


----->8-----

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
index 546968d8a349..f29da6e8dc08 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c

@@ -1023,12 +1023,14 @@ arm_mali_lpae_alloc_pgtable(struct

io_pgtable_cfg *cfg, void *cookie)
          iop = arm_64_lpae_alloc_pgtable_s1(cfg, cookie);
          if (iop) {
                  u64 mair, ttbr;
+               struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data = io_pgtable_ops_to_data(&iop->ops);

+               data->levels = 4;
                  /* Copy values as union fields overlap */
                  mair = cfg->arm_lpae_s1_cfg.mair[0];
                  ttbr = cfg->arm_lpae_s1_cfg.ttbr[0];

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel