On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 11:10:26AM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 12:49:52PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
dg1_gt_workarounds_init() is only ever called for DG1, so there is no
point checking it again.
Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c | 12 +++---------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
index 32aa1647721a..eb6cc4867d67 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
@@ -1472,21 +1472,15 @@ gen12_gt_workarounds_init(struct intel_gt *gt, struct i915_wa_list *wal)
static void
dg1_gt_workarounds_init(struct intel_gt *gt, struct i915_wa_list *wal)
{
- struct drm_i915_private *i915 = gt->i915;
-
Looks like you pushed some stale version of this patch which
didn't remove this variable. Now the CONFIG_DRM_I915_WERROR=y
build is broken.
Did you lose that from your pre-push build .config?
no, looks like a conflict between drm-intel-gt-next and drm-intel-next
69ea87e1591a ("drm/i915/dg1: Drop support for pre-production steppings")
merged in drm-intel-next dropped the only user.
This patch was merged in drm-intel-gt-next and I didn't realize the
race was with the other branch rather than with the same branch due to
taking a long time for me to apply. Let me rebuild drm-tip to fix it up.
Lucas De Marchi
gen12_gt_workarounds_init(gt, wal);
/* Wa_1409420604:dg1 */
- if (IS_DG1(i915))
- wa_mcr_write_or(wal,
- SUBSLICE_UNIT_LEVEL_CLKGATE2,
- CPSSUNIT_CLKGATE_DIS);
+ wa_mcr_write_or(wal, SUBSLICE_UNIT_LEVEL_CLKGATE2,
+ CPSSUNIT_CLKGATE_DIS);
/* Wa_1408615072:dg1 */
/* Empirical testing shows this register is unaffected by engine reset. */
- if (IS_DG1(i915))
- wa_write_or(wal, UNSLICE_UNIT_LEVEL_CLKGATE2,
- VSUNIT_CLKGATE_DIS_TGL);
+ wa_write_or(wal, UNSLICE_UNIT_LEVEL_CLKGATE2, VSUNIT_CLKGATE_DIS_TGL);
}
static void
--
2.39.0
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
