On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:31:31 -0700
Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> While trying to track down the power regression, I noticed that on my
> SNB I had more severe problems, ie. forcewake seemed to never happen
> once i915 was loaded. After a bit of bisection, I tracked the bad commit
> to:
>
> commit 7b0cfee1a24efdfe0235bac62e53f686fe8a8e24
> Merge: 9756fe3 6b16351
> Author: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
> Date: Mon Jun 25 19:06:12 2012 +0200
>
> Merge tag 'v3.5-rc4' into drm-intel-next-queued
>
> I changed the macro to the inline statement to debug a little better and
> noticed that the problem went away. It's a bit embarrassing, but I can't
> figure out what is wrong with the old macro.
>
> In any case, I think this warrants further review.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> index ff569cc..a859169 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> @@ -1020,10 +1020,13 @@ MODULE_DESCRIPTION(DRIVER_DESC);
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL and additional rights");
>
> /* We give fast paths for the really cool registers */
> -#define NEEDS_FORCE_WAKE(dev_priv, reg) \
> - ((HAS_FORCE_WAKE((dev_priv)->dev)) && \
> - ((reg) < 0x40000) && \
> - ((reg) != FORCEWAKE))
> +static inline bool NEEDS_FORCE_WAKE(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> + u32 reg)
> +{
> + return (HAS_FORCE_WAKE(dev_priv->dev)) &&
> + (reg < 0x40000) &&
> + (reg != FORCEWAKE);
> +}
>
> static bool IS_DISPLAYREG(u32 reg)
> {
Quick followup for anyone paying attention. The sympon and fix are both
reproducible. I've sent relevant info to Daniel to sift through the
crap.
--
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center
