On 02/09/2025 12:30, Timur Kristóf wrote:
On Mon, 2025-09-01 at 11:13 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
Hi,
On 01/09/2025 11:00, Timur Kristóf wrote:
Technically not necessary, but clear the extra dwords too,
so that the command processors don't read uninitialized memory.
Fixes: c8c1a1d2ef04 ("drm/amdgpu: define and add extra dword for
jpeg ring")
Signed-off-by: Timur Kristóf <timur.kris...@gmail.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
index 7670f5d82b9e..6a55a85744a9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
@@ -474,6 +474,11 @@ static inline void
amdgpu_ring_clear_ring(struct amdgpu_ring *ring)
while (i <= ring->buf_mask)
ring->ring[i++] = ring->funcs->nop;
+ /* Technically not necessary, but clear the extra dwords
too,
+ * so that the command processors don't read uninitialized
memory.
+ */
+ for (i = 0; i < ring->funcs->extra_dw; i++)
+ ring->ring[ring->ring_size / 4 + i] = ring->funcs-
nop;
Should I resend this maybe?
Hi Tvrtko,
The patch you commented on is going to be dropped.
However, your patch makes good sense, so I can include it in the next
version of this series if that's OK.
Yes, (more than) fine by me. Thanks!
Tvrtko
@Christian - does that sound alright to you?
commit 11b0b5d942fe46bfb01f021cdb0616c8385d5ea8
Author: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@igalia.com>
Date: Thu Dec 26 16:12:37 2024 +0000
drm/amdgpu: Use memset32 for ring clearing
Use memset32 instead of open coding it, just because it is
a tiny bit nicer.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@igalia.com>
Cc: Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com>
Cc: Sunil Khatri <sunil.kha...@amd.com>
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
index dee5a1b4e572..96bfc0c23413 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
@@ -369,10 +369,7 @@ static inline void
amdgpu_ring_set_preempt_cond_exec(struct amdgpu_ring *ring,
static inline void amdgpu_ring_clear_ring(struct amdgpu_ring *ring)
{
- int i = 0;
- while (i <= ring->buf_mask)
- ring->ring[i++] = ring->funcs->nop;
-
+ memset32(ring->ring, ring->funcs->nop, ring->buf_mask + 1);
}
static inline void amdgpu_ring_write(struct amdgpu_ring *ring,
uint32_t v)
Looks like with two loops it would made even more sense to
consolidate.
Regards,
Tvrtko
}
static inline void amdgpu_ring_write(struct amdgpu_ring *ring,
uint32_t v)
