On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 01:05:32PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2013/3/5 Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau at intel.com>:
> > On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 05:44:18PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> >> From: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com>
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> tools/intel_reg_dumper.c | 6 +++++-
> >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tools/intel_reg_dumper.c b/tools/intel_reg_dumper.c
> >> index 20f332f..b66a1ea 100644
> >> --- a/tools/intel_reg_dumper.c
> >> +++ b/tools/intel_reg_dumper.c
> >> @@ -2326,8 +2326,12 @@ int main(int argc, char** argv)
> >> if (devid) {
> >> if (IS_GEN5(devid))
> >> pch = PCH_IBX;
> >> - else
> >> + else if (IS_GEN6(devid) || IS_IVYBRIDGE(devid))
> >> pch = PCH_CPT;
> >> + else if (IS_HASWELL(devid))
> >> + pch = PCH_LPT;
> >> + else
> >> + pch = PCH_NONE;
> >
> > In patch 6/6 you're fixing the PCH detection code in lib/ maybe it'd be
> > a good idea to use it to detect the PCH of having heuristics on device 2
> > -> PCH mappings?
>
> Do you mean 1/6? We can't use intel_check_pch() here because we're
> using the "file" and "devid" options: we're dumping registers from a
> file, not from real hardware. So sometimes you create the file on one
> machine (e.g., IVB) and dump on another (e.g. ILK).
Ah, of course, not enough context for that to be obvious :) For that I
guess I get to review the rest of the patches.
--
Damien
