Op 08-11-17 om 12:25 schreef Ville Syrjälä: > On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 11:40:19AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Op 02-11-17 om 17:11 schreef Ville Syrjälä: >>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 05:19:07PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >>>> On Thu, 02 Nov 2017, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 02:56:51PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >>>>>> This interface is deprecated, and has been replaced by the upstream >>>>>> drm crc interface. >>>>> Before we nuke this I would like to see an option in the new interface >>>>> to not filter out the "bad" CRCs. When analyzing how the hardware >>>>> behaves seeing every CRC can be valuable. And I'm not at all convinced >>>>> we should be dropping as many CRCs as we are currently. >>>> I'm not against it, but do you have a concrete proposal on how that >>>> option would look like? >>> Some kind of of filter_bad_crcs file with a bool value perhaps? >> You can set sources, might as well add a nofilter option.. But I don't see what it has to do >> with this patch? This problem existed since before the api was introduced.. Only difference >> is kernel eats possibly corrupt CRCs now instead of IGT. > I don't use igt for this. > If it's not in IGT then I'm not sure we should hold upthis patch for it tbh. You can always change skipped = 0 to skipped = 2 for the new debugfs interface to find bugs with garbage CRC values, or add a flag to pipe source parsing for not skipping garbage CRC's. Either way I think that it shouldn't hold up this patch. Cheers, ~Maarten _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
