Skip to content
Permalink
Browse files
drm/amd/display: Add DC_FP helper to check FPU state
To fully isolate FPU operations in a single place, we must avoid
situations where compilers spill FP values to registers due to FP enable
in a specific C file. Note that even if we isolate all FPU functions in
a single file and call its interface from other files, the compiler
might enable the use of FPU before we call DC_FP_START. Nevertheless, it
is the programmer's responsibility to invoke DC_FP_START/END in the
correct place. To highlight situations where developers forgot to use
the FP protection before calling the DC FPU interface functions, we
introduce a helper that checks if the function is invoked under FP
protection. If not, it will trigger a kernel warning.

Changes since V1:
- Remove fp_enable variables
- Rename dc_is_fp_enabled to dc_assert_fp_enabled
- Replace wrong variable type

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Siqueira <Rodrigo.Siqueira@amd.com>
  • Loading branch information
rodrigosiqueira authored and intel-lab-lkp committed Jul 13, 2021
1 parent 110dc7b commit 86e864484b1781d5a294660fe92f5ba9664d7612
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 4 changed files with 42 additions and 0 deletions.
@@ -41,6 +41,28 @@

static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, fpu_recursion_depth);

/**
* dc_assert_fp_enabled - Check if FPU protection is enabled
*
* This function tells if the code is already under FPU protection or not. A
* function that works as an API for a set of FPU operations can use this
* function for checking if the caller invoked it after DC_FP_START(). For
* example, take a look at dcn2x.c file.
*
* Return:
* Return true if we already enabled FPU protection, otherwise return false.
*/
inline bool dc_assert_fp_enabled(void)
{
int *pcpu, depth = 0;

pcpu = get_cpu_ptr(&fpu_recursion_depth);
depth = this_cpu_read(fpu_recursion_depth);
put_cpu_ptr(&fpu_recursion_depth);

return depth > 1;
}

/**
* dc_fpu_begin - Enables FPU protection
* @function_name: A string containing the function name for debug purposes
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
#ifndef __DC_FPU_H__
#define __DC_FPU_H__

bool dc_assert_fp_enabled(void);
void dc_fpu_begin(const char *function_name, const int line);
void dc_fpu_end(const char *function_name, const int line);

@@ -2355,7 +2355,9 @@ int dcn20_populate_dml_pipes_from_context(
}

/* populate writeback information */
DC_FP_START();
dc->res_pool->funcs->populate_dml_writeback_from_context(dc, res_ctx, pipes);
DC_FP_END();

return pipe_cnt;
}
@@ -41,6 +41,22 @@
* that deals with FP register is contained within this call.
* 3. All function that needs to be accessed outside this file requires a
* public interface that not uses any FPU reference.
* 4. Developers should not use DC_FP_START/END in this file, but they need to
* ensure that the caller invokes it before access any function available in
* this file. For this reason, public API in this file must invoke
* ASSERT(dc_assert_fp_enabled());
*
* Let's expand a little bit more the idea in the code pattern number for. To
* fully isolate FPU operations in a single place, we must avoid situations
* where compilers spill FP values to registers due to FP enable in a specific
* C file. Note that even if we isolate all FPU functions in a single file and
* call its interface from other files, the compiler might enable the use of
* FPU before we call DC_FP_START. Nevertheless, it is the programmer's
* responsibility to invoke DC_FP_START/END in the correct place. To highlight
* situations where developers forgot to use the FP protection before calling
* the DC FPU interface functions, we introduce a helper that checks if the
* function is invoked under FP protection. If not, it will trigger a kernel
* warning.
*/

static noinline void _dcn20_populate_dml_writeback_from_context(struct dc *dc,
@@ -83,5 +99,6 @@ static noinline void _dcn20_populate_dml_writeback_from_context(struct dc *dc,
void dcn20_populate_dml_writeback_from_context(struct dc *dc,
struct resource_context *res_ctx, display_e2e_pipe_params_st *pipes)
{
ASSERT(dc_assert_fp_enabled());
_dcn20_populate_dml_writeback_from_context(dc, res_ctx, pipes);
}

0 comments on commit 86e8644

Please sign in to comment.