On 10/11/2017 11:41 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Oscar Mateo (2017-10-11 19:15:18)Let's try to make sure that all WAs are applied correctly and survive resumes, resets, etc... (with some help from a companion i-g-t patch). Signed-off-by: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c index f108f53..fb49eac 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c @@ -3399,6 +3399,20 @@ static int i915_shared_dplls_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) return 0; }+static void check_wa_register(struct seq_file *m, struct i915_wa_reg *wa_reg)+{ + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); + u32 read; + bool ok; + + read = I915_READ(wa_reg->addr); + ok = (wa_reg->value & wa_reg->mask) == (read & wa_reg->mask); + seq_printf(m, "0x%X: 0x%08x, mask: 0x%08x, read: 0x%08x, status: %s\n", + i915_mmio_reg_offset(wa_reg->addr), + wa_reg->value, wa_reg->mask, read, + ok ? "OK" : "FAIL");So one thing I've been considering is adding the Wa name for easier cross-referencing. I am just worried about the number of strings and whether we should put those names anywhere near user visible output. -Chris
This would fit nicely with the static table proposed by Joonas, but I really don't know if we want the names in visible output...
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
