Nouveau - Oct 2023 - [PATCH 17/44] drm/nouveau/mmu/tu102-: prepare for GSP-RM

From: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com>

- (temporarily) disable if GSP-RM detected, will be added later

Signed-off-by: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c
index 8d060ce47f86..87979952df4b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
 #include "vmm.h"
 
 #include <core/option.h>
+#include <subdev/gsp.h>
 
 #include <nvif/class.h>
 
@@ -54,5 +55,8 @@ int
 tu102_mmu_new(struct nvkm_device *device, enum nvkm_subdev_type type, int inst,
 	      struct nvkm_mmu **pmmu)
 {
+	if (nvkm_gsp_rm(device->gsp))
+		return -ENODEV;
+
 	return nvkm_mmu_new_(&tu102_mmu, device, type, inst, pmmu);
 }
-- 
2.41.0

On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 06:21 +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote:
> From: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com>
> 
> - (temporarily) disable if GSP-RM detected, will be added later
disable _what_?
The other commit messages at least briefly name the component. This one
should as well.

Furthermore, I'd say that the wording should be something like "will be
enabled again later, after XXX has been done".

P.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com>
> ---
> ?drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c | 4 ++++
> ?1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c
> index 8d060ce47f86..87979952df4b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/tu102.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> ?#include "vmm.h"
> ?
> ?#include <core/option.h>
> +#include <subdev/gsp.h>
> ?
> ?#include <nvif/class.h>
> ?
> @@ -54,5 +55,8 @@ int
> ?tu102_mmu_new(struct nvkm_device *device, enum nvkm_subdev_type
> type, int inst,
> ????????????? struct nvkm_mmu **pmmu)
> ?{
> +???????if (nvkm_gsp_rm(device->gsp))
> +???????????????return -ENODEV;
> +
> ????????return nvkm_mmu_new_(&tu102_mmu, device, type, inst, pmmu);
> ?}