On Wed, 14 Dec 2016, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 02:00:11PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 01:10:59PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> > c9c4b6f6c283 ("drm/i915: fix swizzle detection for gen3") added a
>> > complicated check for I915G/I945G. Pineview and other gen3 devices match
>> > IS_MOBILE() anyway. Simplify.
>> >
>> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx>
>> > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c | 3 +--
>> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>> > index 09193cfb5d8b..e03983973252 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>> > @@ -513,8 +513,7 @@ i915_gem_detect_bit_6_swizzle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>> > swizzle_x = I915_BIT_6_SWIZZLE_NONE;
>> > swizzle_y = I915_BIT_6_SWIZZLE_NONE;
>> > } else if (IS_MOBILE(dev_priv) ||
>> > - (IS_GEN3(dev_priv) &&
>> > - !IS_G33(dev_priv) && !IS_PINEVIEW(dev_priv))) {
>> > + IS_I915G(dev_priv) || IS_I945G(dev_priv)) {
>>
>> Seems to miss i915gm and i945gm. Hm, but then you mention those are
>> mobile. Then I guess it's a bikeshed, but at least a correct one.
>
> Considering the discussion over the last few days, I'd rather see
> IS_MOBILE() phased out and not relied upon even more.
> /bikeshed
I'm afraid I already pushed (thanks for the review Daniel).
Last I looked, IS_MOBILE() seems like difficult to untangle, and this is
not one of the hard spots. Simpler conditions should actually be
helpful.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
