On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:46:17AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > By our earlier reckoning, move from a snooped/llc setting to an uncached > setting, leaves the CPU cache in a consistent state irrespective of our > domain tracking - so we can forgo the warning about the lack of > invalidation. Similarly for any writes posted to the snooped CPU domain, > we know will be safely clflushed to the uncached PTEs after forcing the > domain change. > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I ran into this several times while doing the PPGTT development, and was always scared to just remove it. Does it make sense to keep the write_domain assertion with this gone? > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > index 925c77d..1d3e57e 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > @@ -3520,7 +3520,6 @@ int i915_gem_object_set_cache_level(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, > * Just set it to the CPU cache for now. > */ > WARN_ON(obj->base.write_domain & ~I915_GEM_DOMAIN_CPU); > - WARN_ON(obj->base.read_domains & ~I915_GEM_DOMAIN_CPU); > > old_read_domains = obj->base.read_domains; > old_write_domain = obj->base.write_domain; > -- > 1.8.4.rc2 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
