On 07/23/2019 05:30 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Xiaolin Zhang (2019-07-23 12:31:56)
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vgpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vgpu.c
>> index dbd1fa3..9b37dd1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vgpu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vgpu.c
>> @@ -95,7 +95,14 @@ void i915_detect_vgpu(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>> dev_priv->vgpu.caps = readl(shared_area + vgtif_offset(vgt_caps));
>>
>> dev_priv->vgpu.active = true;
>> - DRM_INFO("Virtual GPU for Intel GVT-g detected.\n");
>> +
>> + if (!intel_vgpu_check_pv_caps(dev_priv, shared_area)) {
>> + DRM_INFO("Virtual GPU for Intel GVT-g detected.\n");
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + DRM_INFO("Virtual GPU for Intel GVT-g detected with pv_caps 0x%x.\n",
>> + dev_priv->vgpu.pv_caps);
> This is a user-facing message, avoid using any jargon. Instead of
> pv_caps:%x, expand it to a set of strings if you think it's important
> for the user to know. It's probably not! But you probably want to
> include the caps in debugfs/i915_capabilities.
> -Chris
>
Chris, thanks your time to review and it is good point.
I will polish the message like this "xxx GVT-g detected with PV
Optimizations."
and will include the pv caps in debugfs/i915_capabilities. do you think
is it better?
-BRs, Xiaolin
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
