On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 04:06:06PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 04:46:12PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 02:04:25PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > Instead of repeatedly bombarding the user with a request to reboot and
> > > increase the stolen size with every fb refresh, just inform them the
> > > first time only.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 3 +--
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > index 3534a71..05bc0a4 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > @@ -481,8 +481,7 @@ void intel_update_fbc(struct drm_device *dev)
> > > goto out_disable;
> > >
> > > if (i915_gem_stolen_setup_compression(dev, intel_fb->obj->base.size)) {
> > > - DRM_INFO("not enough stolen space for compressed buffer (need %zd bytes), disabling\n", intel_fb->obj->base.size);
> > > - DRM_INFO("hint: you may be able to increase stolen memory size in the BIOS to avoid this\n");
> > > + pr_info_once("not enough stolen space for compressed buffer (need %zd bytes), disabling. Hint: you may be able to inrease stolen memory size in hte BIOS to avoid this.\n", intel_fb->obj->base.size);
> > s/hte/the/ in the above line while at it?
>
> The other problem is that we drop the "drm: ", so perhaps we should add
> that back in (or start using "drm/i915: " or "i915: ").
I've looked through all the macros, and there doesn't seem to be a
dev_info_once version. While we discuss debug output, I still wonder
whether we should eventually switch over to the dynamic device debug
stuff. But I'm not sure whether that's really better than the current
scheme.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
