On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 11:26 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 07:31:34PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:15:31 +0000, Matthew Garrett <mjg at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > So the user has to choose between 5W of power saving or having dmar? And > > > we default to giving them dmar? I think that's going to come as a > > > surprise to people. > > > > You'd have to go into the BIOS to turn this on for most machines at > > least? > > > > But, yeah, it seems like we should be turning DMAR off unless explicitly > > requested; I can't understand how you'd ever need this running native on > > the hardware. Not exactly an area I care about deeply; I've always > > worked hard to make sure all virtualization garbage is disabled on every > > machine I use. > > Problem is that we need to disable dmar on the entire box, afaics. And I > assume that a bunch of people abusing desktop boards as servers will call > "regression" on that. Hm, do you really have to disable it for the entire box, or just the graphics? Do we have a coherent erratum from Intel for the issues mentioned above with DMAR+gfx+RC6? Keith, do you know if a sighting has been filed and the hardware folks are working on it? Rajesh, are you familiar with this issue? -- dwmw2 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5818 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/attachments/20111123/86c5b9c5/attachment-0001.bin>
