On 09/06/2017 02:19 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Oscar Mateo (2017-09-06 22:12:11)
Afaict, GEN9_GAMT_ECO_REG_RW_IA does not live in the context, so writing
it on every context creation is overkill (and wrong).
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c | 25 +++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
index 23812ec..9f01a5c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c
@@ -985,8 +985,9 @@ static int skl_init_workarounds(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
/* WaInPlaceDecompressionHang:skl */
if (IS_SKL_REVID(dev_priv, SKL_REVID_H0, REVID_FOREVER))
- WA_SET_BIT(GEN9_GAMT_ECO_REG_RW_IA,
- GAMT_ECO_ENABLE_IN_PLACE_DECOMPRESS);
Anything using a precalculated RMW value for a ctx register is indeed
fishy. Whilst you are checking this register, can you check whether the
other users of WA_SET_BIT/WA_CLR_BIT are indeed context bound?
-Chris
Sure, I'll try to go through all of them (but I'd like to clarify first
if I should also be moving those I find to xxx_init_clock_gating).
-- Oscar
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
