On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, "Zanoni, Paulo R" <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Em Qua, 2016-09-14 às 12:59 +0300, Jani Nikula escreveu: >> On Tue, 13 Sep 2016, "Zanoni, Paulo R" <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> > >> > I got confirmation from the Hardware guys that KBL does need to run >> > the >> > SAGV code, and it has the same latency as SKL. Also, all SKL >> > production >> > steppings need to run the SAGV code. >> >> Can you get confirmation what's the first shipped production >> stepping? > > https://01.org/sites/default/files/documentation/intel-gfx-prm-osrc-skl > -vol04-configurations.pdf#page=15 > > But I have to admit that I still have pre-prod machines and it would be > very convenient to me if they keep working :) I think that's a false convenience. If you're developing or testing stuff on early hardware, you run the risk of having issues only related to that hardware, already fixed in production. Regression reports from people running early hardware risk stalling otherwise valid patches for the wrong reasons. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
