On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 12:14:10PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >-static int intel_fw_table_check(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> >+static int intel_fw_table_check(const struct intel_forcewake_range *ranges,
> >+ unsigned int num_ranges,
> >+ int gen)
> > {
> >- const struct intel_forcewake_range *ranges;
> >- unsigned int num_ranges, i;
> >+ unsigned int i;
> > s32 prev;
> >
> >- ranges = i915->uncore.fw_domains_table;
> >- if (!ranges)
> >- return 0;
> >-
> >- num_ranges = i915->uncore.fw_domains_table_entries;
> > for (i = 0, prev = -1; i < num_ranges; i++, ranges++) {
> > /* Check that the tabke is watertight */
> >- if (WARN_ON(IS_GEN9(i915) && (prev + 1) != (s32)ranges->start))
> >+ if (WARN_ON(gen >= 9 && (prev + 1) != (s32)ranges->start))
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > /* Check that the table never goes backwards */
> >@@ -1965,11 +1961,38 @@ static int intel_shadow_table_check(void)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> >+int intel_uncore_mock_selftests(void)
> >+{
> >+ struct {
> >+ const struct intel_forcewake_range *ranges;
> >+ unsigned int num_ranges;
> >+ int gen;
> >+ } fw[] = {
> >+ { __vlv_fw_ranges, ARRAY_SIZE(__vlv_fw_ranges), 7 },
> >+ { __chv_fw_ranges, ARRAY_SIZE(__chv_fw_ranges), 8 },
> >+ { __gen9_fw_ranges, ARRAY_SIZE(__gen9_fw_ranges), 9 },
>
> Tables are not per gen so this is a bit confusing. I don't have a
> much better idea though. Apart from replacing "int gen" with "bool
> test_watertight"?
bool is_watertight is a good suggestion.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
