On 12/11/18 4:06 AM, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 3:40 AM Zhang, Jerry(Junwei) <Jerry.Zhang@xxxxxxx> wrote:
we can drop MC update patch, since a new fw could fix that.
Shouldn't we apply this as well for consistency?
I did apply it for simple test.
That looks no harm.
But confirmed the MC firmware version table, it shares the same MC as P10.
So I drop this patch now.
That means not every variant uses a newer MC firmware, as I could see now.
Regards,
Jerry
Alex
Regards,
Jerry
On 12/7/18 3:19 PM, Junwei Zhang wrote:
Some new variants require different firmwares.
Signed-off-by: Junwei Zhang <Jerry.Zhang@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v8_0.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v8_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v8_0.c
index 1ad7e6b8ed1d..0edb8622f666 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v8_0.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v8_0.c
@@ -244,7 +244,10 @@ static int gmc_v8_0_init_microcode(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
case CHIP_POLARIS10:
if ((adev->pdev->device == 0x67df) &&
((adev->pdev->revision == 0xe1) ||
- (adev->pdev->revision == 0xf7)))
+ (adev->pdev->revision == 0xf7)) ||
+ ((adev->pdev->device == 0x6fdf) &&
+ ((adev->pdev->revision == 0xef) ||
+ (adev->pdev->revision == 0xff))))
chip_name = "polaris10_k";
else
chip_name = "polaris10";
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
