drm/i915: Adjust size of PIPE_CONTROL used for gen8 render seqno write

We started to use PIPE_CONTROL to write render ring seqno in order to
combat seqno write vs interrupt generation problems. This was introduced
by commit 7c17d377374d ("drm/i915: Use ordered seqno write interrupt
generation on gen8+ execlists").

On gen8+ size of PIPE_CONTROL with Post Sync Operation should be
6 dwords. When we're using older 5-dword variant it's possible to
observe inconsistent values written by PIPE_CONTROL with Post
Sync Operation from user batches, resulting in rendering corruptions.

v2: Fix BAT failures
v3: Comments on alignment and thrashing high dword of seqno (Chris)
v4: Updated commit msg (Mika)

Testcase: igt/gem_pipe_control_store_loop/*-qword-write
Issue: VIZ-7393
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Cc: Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Tested-by: Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1460469115-26002-1-git-send-email-michal.winiarski@intel.com
(cherry picked from commit ce81a65c79d6012a384563caf76d47e28947a347)
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>

drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c

@@ -1913,15 +1913,18 @@ static int gen8_emit_request_render(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request)
 	struct intel_ringbuffer *ringbuf = request->ringbuf;
 	int ret;
 
-	ret = intel_logical_ring_begin(request, 6 + WA_TAIL_DWORDS);
+	ret = intel_logical_ring_begin(request, 8 + WA_TAIL_DWORDS);
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 
+	/* We're using qword write, seqno should be aligned to 8 bytes. */
+	BUILD_BUG_ON(I915_GEM_HWS_INDEX & 1);
+
 	/* w/a for post sync ops following a GPGPU operation we
 	 * need a prior CS_STALL, which is emitted by the flush
 	 * following the batch.
 	 */
-	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, GFX_OP_PIPE_CONTROL(5));
+	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, GFX_OP_PIPE_CONTROL(6));
 	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf,
 				(PIPE_CONTROL_GLOBAL_GTT_IVB |
 				 PIPE_CONTROL_CS_STALL |
@@ -1929,7 +1932,10 @@ static int gen8_emit_request_render(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request)
 	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, hws_seqno_address(request->ring));
 	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, 0);
 	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, i915_gem_request_get_seqno(request));
+	/* We're thrashing one dword of HWS. */
+	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, 0);
 	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, MI_USER_INTERRUPT);
+	intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, MI_NOOP);
 	return intel_logical_ring_advance_and_submit(request);
 }