Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add relocation exceptions for two other platforms

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 20:04, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 10:35:49AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 May 2021 at 03:05, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:31:39AM +0200, Zbigniew Kempczyński wrote:
> > > > We have established previously we stop using relocations starting
> > > > from gen12 platforms with Tigerlake as an exception. Unfortunately
> > > > we need extend transition period and support relocations for two
> > > > other igfx platforms - Rocketlake and Alderlake.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Zbigniew Kempczyński <zbigniew.kempczynski@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > So the annoying thing here is that now media-driver is fixed:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/intel/media-driver/commit/144020c37770083974bedf59902b70b8f444c799
> > >
> > > Which means igt is really the only thing left.
> > >
> > > Dave, is this still ok for an acked exception, or is this now leaning
> > > towards "just fix igt"?
> >
> > Oh that isn't great is it, I had thought it was the media-driver,
> > keeping a big uAPI like this open just for the test code seems a bit
> > silly. I get the tests are testing more than just relocs, but it's a
> > pretty big interface to leave lying around if we can avoid it.
>
> So since we need to do the work anyway for DG1+ what about some interim
> hack? Currently ADL still has the require_force_probe flag set. We could
> re-enable relocations just for ADL, only while this flag is set. This
> gives us a bunch of wiggle room, unblocks everything else (CI is a bit on
> fire right now due to this and practially unuseable on ADL gem areay) and
> we'll still make sure that when ADL is all done we wont expose relocations
> just for igt.
>
> Thoughts?

I can handle that as a compromise, though I'd not want to block ADL
getting out of alpha over some IGT that needs porting.

Dave.

> -Daniel
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux