Am 11.02.20 um 05:16 schrieb Guchun Chen:
Former comment looks to be one intended behavior in code,
actually it's not. So correct it.
Suggested-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Guchun Chen <guchun.chen@xxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
index af341a272e30..82476f6acfad 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
@@ -4374,7 +4374,12 @@ static int gfx_v9_0_ecc_late_init(void *handle)
struct amdgpu_device *adev = (struct amdgpu_device *)handle;
int r;
- /* limit gds clearing operation in cold boot sequence */
+ /*
+ * Temp workaround to fix the issue that CP firmware fails to
+ * update read pointer when CPDMA is writing clearing operation
+ * to GDS in suspend/resume sequence on several cards. So just
+ * limit this operation in cold boot sequence.
+ */
if (!adev->in_suspend) {
r = gfx_v9_0_do_edc_gds_workarounds(adev);
if (r)
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
