Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Include navi10_get_allowed_feature_mask patch #312

Closed
dataprolet opened this issue Jun 13, 2023 · 4 comments
Closed

Include navi10_get_allowed_feature_mask patch #312

dataprolet opened this issue Jun 13, 2023 · 4 comments

Comments

@dataprolet
Copy link

dataprolet commented Jun 13, 2023 •
edited

Why is the following patch not included in the kernel? It's included in linux and archlinux/linux.

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/swsmu/smu11/navi10_ppt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/swsmu/smu11/navi10_ppt.c
index 0bcd4fe0ef17..5b7a780cbd54 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/swsmu/smu11/navi10_ppt.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/swsmu/smu11/navi10_ppt.c
@@ -304,7 +304,8 @@ navi10_get_allowed_feature_mask(struct smu_context *smu,
                                | FEATURE_MASK(FEATURE_GFX_SS_BIT)
                                | FEATURE_MASK(FEATURE_APCC_DFLL_BIT)
                                | FEATURE_MASK(FEATURE_FW_CTF_BIT)
-                               | FEATURE_MASK(FEATURE_OUT_OF_BAND_MONITOR_BIT);
+                               | FEATURE_MASK(FEATURE_OUT_OF_BAND_MONITOR_BIT)
+                               | FEATURE_MASK(FEATURE_TEMP_DEPENDENT_VMIN_BIT);
 
        if (adev->pm.pp_feature & PP_SCLK_DPM_MASK)
                *(uint64_t *)feature_mask |= FEATURE_MASK(FEATURE_DPM_GFXCLK_BIT);```
@damentz
Copy link
Member

damentz commented Jun 13, 2023

Do you have a link to the commit upstream?

@dataprolet
Copy link
Author

Just the ones mentioned in the thread I have already linked, sorry.

@heftig
Copy link

heftig commented Jun 13, 2023

This is 3043d13f, part of v6.4-rc1.

@damentz
Copy link
Member

damentz commented Jul 2, 2023 •
edited

Fix is in 6.4 branch and was just merged to 6.3/main.

1f34220

@damentz damentz closed this as completed Jul 2, 2023
heftig pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 3, 2024
@sm00th
arm64: bpf: fix 32bit unconditional bswap
a51cd6b 
In case when is64 == 1 in emit(A64_REV32(is64, dst, dst), ctx) the
generated insn reverses byte order for both high and low 32-bit words,
resuling in an incorrect swap as indicated by the jit test:

[ 9757.262607] test_bpf: #312 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.264435] test_bpf: #313 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89 jited:1 ret 1460850314 != -271733879 (0x5712ce8a != 0xefcdab89)FAIL (1 times)
[ 9757.266260] test_bpf: #314 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.268000] test_bpf: #315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.269686] test_bpf: #316 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.271380] test_bpf: #317 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476 jited:1 ret -1460850316 != 271733878 (0xa8ed3174 != 0x10325476)FAIL (1 times)
[ 9757.273022] test_bpf: #318 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe jited:1 7 PASS
[ 9757.274721] test_bpf: #319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476 jited:1 9 PASS

Fix this by forcing 32bit variant of rev32.

Fixes: 1104247 ("bpf, arm64: Support unconditional bswap")
Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <20240321081809.158803-1-asavkov@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
heftig pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 11, 2024
@sm00th @gregkh
arm64: bpf: fix 32bit unconditional bswap
47f9248 
[ Upstream commit a51cd6b ]

In case when is64 == 1 in emit(A64_REV32(is64, dst, dst), ctx) the
generated insn reverses byte order for both high and low 32-bit words,
resuling in an incorrect swap as indicated by the jit test:

[ 9757.262607] test_bpf: #312 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.264435] test_bpf: #313 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89 jited:1 ret 1460850314 != -271733879 (0x5712ce8a != 0xefcdab89)FAIL (1 times)
[ 9757.266260] test_bpf: #314 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.268000] test_bpf: #315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.269686] test_bpf: #316 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032 jited:1 8 PASS
[ 9757.271380] test_bpf: #317 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476 jited:1 ret -1460850316 != 271733878 (0xa8ed3174 != 0x10325476)FAIL (1 times)
[ 9757.273022] test_bpf: #318 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe jited:1 7 PASS
[ 9757.274721] test_bpf: #319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476 jited:1 9 PASS

Fix this by forcing 32bit variant of rev32.

Fixes: 1104247 ("bpf, arm64: Support unconditional bswap")
Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <20240321081809.158803-1-asavkov@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@heftig @damentz @dataprolet