Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for Geminilake

[Ian W MORRISON]

Hi Anusha,

Can I ask if this is on anyone's radar as I'm concerned this patch will
stall otherwise?

I see that the significance of testing with the 4.14 kernel enabled the
firmware to be included in the latest Chrome OS kernel (
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/chromium-os-reviews/jtpHvZOfZ-Q).
It is important to similarly include in the mainline and stable kernels to
facilitate various distros that are now raising bug reports (for example:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/intel/+bug/1760545).

Many thanks,
Ian
On Sun, 22 Apr 2018 at 08:46, Ian W MORRISON <ianwmorri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 21 April 2018 at 11:22, Botello Ortega, Luis
> <luis.botello.ort...@intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi all:
> >
> > We tested GLK DMC 1.04 FW in last week of September 2017, using the
latest drm-tip version for that time (4.14.0-rc2) and according to our
results we could declare this FW as acceptable and healthy to be used with
kernel version 4.14 .
> > However, we cannot guarantee quality and healthy of this FW if it is
used in top of current drm-tip kernel (4.17-rc0).
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Luis Botello
> >
> >

> Your measured response is appreciated and raises at least four
> possible alternatives for this patch to proceed:

> 1. It is normal that firmware is *only* tested at a certain point in
> time with the drm-tip version of the mainline kernel so that the
> statement 'firmware X is acceptable and healthy to be used with kernel
> version Y but is not guaranteed with Y+1 or Y+n' always holds true for
> any microarchitecture codename's DMC firmware. Therefore it is
> appropriate for this patch to have a restricted 'Cc:
> sta...@vger.kernel.org # 4.14' tag together with an explicit
> 'Tested-by: (in 4.14)' tag.
> 2. As firmware testing was not performed on 4.15 and subsequent
> versions, testing is still required on versions 4.15 through to the
> current RC of version 4.17 for the patch to receive a 'Tested-by:' tag
> together with a 'Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 4.14' tag.
> 3. Further firmware testing will only be undertaken for the current RC
> of version 4.17 and on successful completion the patch will only
> receive a 'Tested-by:' tag. A 'Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org' tag is not
> applicable.
> 4. The firmware was not tested on 4.15 and subsequent versions as it's
> functionality was provided by alternative means and therefore the
> patch is only required in version 4.14 and should have a 'Cc:
> sta...@vger.kernel.org # 4.14 only' tag together with a restricted
> 'Tested-by: (only in 4.14)' tag.

> Could you indicate which alternative is appropriate? If further
> firmware testing is required (as in points 2 or 3) then can an
> expected completion date be provided?

> Best regards,
> Ian
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for Geminilake

[Ian W MORRISON]

On 21 April 2018 at 11:22, Botello Ortega, Luis
 wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> We tested GLK DMC 1.04 FW in last week of September 2017, using the latest 
> drm-tip version for that time (4.14.0-rc2) and according to our results we 
> could declare this FW as acceptable and healthy to be used with kernel 
> version 4.14 .
> However, we cannot guarantee quality and healthy of this FW if it is used in 
> top of current drm-tip kernel (4.17-rc0).
>
> Best Regards
> Luis Botello
>
>

Your measured response is appreciated and raises at least four
possible alternatives for this patch to proceed:

1. It is normal that firmware is *only* tested at a certain point in
time with the drm-tip version of the mainline kernel so that the
statement 'firmware X is acceptable and healthy to be used with kernel
version Y but is not guaranteed with Y+1 or Y+n' always holds true for
any microarchitecture codename's DMC firmware. Therefore it is
appropriate for this patch to have a restricted 'Cc:
sta...@vger.kernel.org # 4.14' tag together with an explicit
'Tested-by: (in 4.14)' tag.
2. As firmware testing was not performed on 4.15 and subsequent
versions, testing is still required on versions 4.15 through to the
current RC of version 4.17 for the patch to receive a 'Tested-by:' tag
together with a 'Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 4.14' tag.
3. Further firmware testing will only be undertaken for the current RC
of version 4.17 and on successful completion the patch will only
receive a 'Tested-by:' tag. A 'Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org' tag is not
applicable.
4. The firmware was not tested on 4.15 and subsequent versions as it's
functionality was provided by alternative means and therefore the
patch is only required in version 4.14 and should have a 'Cc:
sta...@vger.kernel.org # 4.14 only' tag together with a restricted
'Tested-by: (only in 4.14)' tag.

Could you indicate which alternative is appropriate? If further
firmware testing is required (as in points 2 or 3) then can an
expected completion date be provided?

Best regards,
Ian
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for Geminilake

[Ian W MORRISON]

On 20 April 2018 at 17:50, Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Ian W MORRISON <ianwmorri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've performed backport testing and some additional analysis as follows:
>
> What testing did you do beyond booting? Did you run igt?
>
> BR,
> Jani.

I did some basic testing including running a 4K video on Chrome whilst
running intel_gpu_top. The intel_gpu_top program doesn't display
anything on 4.12 either with or without the patch as neither I nor
Canonical enabled CONFIG_DRM_I915_ALPHA_SUPPORT. Do you think that the
stable tag should exclude 4.12 because of the 'alpha quality support'
and if so do you want a V2 of the patch?

Best regards,
Ian
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for Geminilake

[Ian W MORRISON]

On 18 April 2018 at 00:14, Joonas Lahtinen
<joonas.lahti...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> Quoting Jani Nikula (2018-04-17 12:02:52)
>> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, "Srivatsa, Anusha" <anusha.sriva...@intel.com> wrote:
>> >>-Original Message-
>> >>From: Jani Nikula [mailto:jani.nik...@linux.intel.com]
>> >>Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:27 AM
>> >>To: Ian W MORRISON <ianwmorri...@gmail.com>
>> >>Cc: Vivi, Rodrigo <rodrigo.v...@intel.com>; Srivatsa, Anusha
>> >><anusha.sriva...@intel.com>; Wajdeczko, Michal
>> >><michal.wajdec...@intel.com>; Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>;
>> >>airl...@linux.ie; joonas.lahti...@linux.intel.com; 
>> >>linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org;
>> >>sta...@vger.kernel.org; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; dri-
>> >>de...@lists.freedesktop.org
>> >>Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for
>> >>Geminilake



In summary so far:

Jani:
> NAK on indiscriminate Cc: stable. There are zero guarantees that
> older kernels will work with whatever firmware you throw at them.
> Who tested the firmware with v4.12 and later? We only have the CI
> results against *current* drm-tip. We don't even know about v4.16.
> I'm not going to ack and take responsibility for the stable backports
> unless someone actually comes forward with credible Tested-bys.

Anusha:
> The stable kernel version is 4.12 and beyond.
> It is appropriate to add the CC: stable in my opinion

Joonas:
> And even then, some distros will be surprised of the new MODULE_FIRMWARE
> and will need to update the linux-firmware package, too.

I've performed backport testing and some additional analysis as follows:

The DMC firmware for GLK was initially included in 4.11
  (commit: dbb28b5c3d3cb945a63030fab8d3894cf335ce19).
Then the firmware version was upgraded to 1.03 in 4.12
  (commit: f4a791819ed00a749a90387aa139706a507aa690).
However MODULE_FIRMWARE for the GLK DMC firmware
was also removed in 4.12
  (commit: d9321a03efcda867b3a8c6327e01808516f0acd7)
together with the firmware version being bumped to 1.04
  (commit: aebfd1d37194e00d4c417e7be97efeb736cd9c04).

The patch below effectively reverts commit d9321a03 because the GLK
firmware is now available in the linux-firmware repository.

To test stable backports I've used Ubuntu 18.04 (Beta 2) userspace with
both Ubuntu (generic) and self-compiled mainline (patched) kernels.
The conclusion was that the patch works across 4.12 to 4.17-rc1 kernels
additionally displaying a 'Possible missing firmware' message when
installing a kernel with the expected firmware missing.

The following are abridged backport test results:

Scenario: No DMC (glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin) firmware installed in
'/lib/firmware/i915'
  Test:Kernel installation ('grep -i dmc' output from 'apt install'):
4.12-generic and 4.15-generic:
  No output # as expected
4.12 to 4.17-rc1-patched:
  W: Possible missing firmware
/lib/firmware/i915/glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin for module i915
  Result: The effect of the patch is to add a 'Possible missing
firmware' message.
  Test: Booting ('grep -i dmc' output from 'dmesg'):
4.12-generic:
  No output # as expected
4.15-generic:
  i915 :00:02.0: Direct firmware load for
i915/glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin failed with error -2
  i915 :00:02.0: Failed to load DMC firmware
i915/glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin. Disabling runtime power management.
  i915 :00:02.0: DMC firmware homepage:
https://01.org/linuxgraphics/downloads/firmware
4.12-patched:
  No output # as expected
4.13 to 4.14-patched:
  i915 :00:02.0: Direct firmware load for
i915/glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin failed with error -2
  i915 :00:02.0: Failed to load DMC firmware
[https://01.org/linuxgraphics/downloads/firmware], disabling runtime
power management.
4.15 to 4.17-rc1-patched:
  i915 :00:02.0: Direct firmware load for
i915/glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin failed with error -2
  i915 :00:02.0: Failed to load DMC firmware
i915/glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin. Disabling runtime power management.
  i915 :00:02.0: DMC firmware homepage:
https://01.org/linuxgraphics/downloads/firmware
  Result: The effect of the patch does not change existing
(non-patched kernel) messages.

Scenario: DMC (glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin) firmware installed in '/lib/firmware/i915'
  Test:Kernel installation ('grep -i dmc' output from 'apt install')
All kernels:
  No messages # as expected
  Result: The effect of the patch does not change existing messages.
  Test" Booting ('grep -i dmc' output from 'dmesg'):
4.12-generic:
  No output # as expected
4.15-generic:
  i915 :00:02.0: Direct firmware load for
i915/glk_dmc_ver1_04.bin failed with error -2
  i915 :00:02.0: Failed to load DMC firmware
i915/glk_dmc_ver

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for Geminilake

[Ian W MORRISON]

On 11 April 2018 at 22:27, Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Ian W MORRISON <ianwmorri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>
>>>
>>> NAK on indiscriminate Cc: stable. There are zero guarantees that older
>>> kernels will work with whatever firmware you throw at them.
>>>
>>
>> I included 'Cc: stable' so the patch would get added to the v4.16 and
>> v4.15 kernels which I have tested with the patch. I found that earlier
>> kernels didn't support the 'linux-firmware' package required to get
>> wifi working on Intel's new Gemini Lake NUC.
>
> You realize that this patch should have nothing to do with wifi?
>

Yes. Runtime power management depends on the patch but when distros
such as Ubuntu are installed on a Intel Gemini Lake NUC as an example,
wifi/bluetooth depends on Intel Wireless-AC 9462 which in turn depends
on v4.15 as a minimum so my logic was to add the patch to 4.15 and later.

> Rodrigo, Anusha, if you think Cc: stable is appropriate, please indicate
> the specific versions of stable it is appropriate for.
>

Thanks you..

Best regards,
Ian
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for Geminilake

[Ian W MORRISON]

>
> NAK on indiscriminate Cc: stable. There are zero guarantees that older
> kernels will work with whatever firmware you throw at them.
>

I included 'Cc: stable' so the patch would get added to the v4.16 and
v4.15 kernels
which I have tested with the patch. I found that earlier kernels
didn't support the
'linux-firmware' package required to get wifi working on Intel's new
Gemini Lake NUC.

>
> PS. How is this a "RESEND"? I haven't seen this before.
>

It is a 'RESEND' for that very reason. I initially sent the patch to
the same people as
a similar patch (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10143637/) however
after realising
this omitted required addresses I added them and resent the patch.

Best regards,
Ian
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx