On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 04:00:09PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> Some BIOS just leak the forcewak bits, which we clean up. >> Unfortunately this has been broken in >> >> commit 521198a2e7095c8c7daa8d7d3a76a110c346be6f >> Author: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Fri Aug 23 16:52:30 2013 +0300 >> >> drm/i915: sanitize forcewake registers on reset >> >> To make this work both for resets and for BIOS takeover just add the >> forcewake clearing call back to intel_uncore_early_sanitize. > > The call to intel_uncore_forcewake_reset() is in > intel_uncore_sanitize(). Do you mind explaining the dependence that > causes us to require an ealry_sanitize? There's no issue in doing so, > just the change log feels inaccurate. Yeah I've forgotten to write down my analysis: "We need to clear the forcewake in early sanitize so that the forcewak dance in intel_uncore_init (to figure out whether we have mt or legacy forcewake on ivb) works. That cleanup fits in nicely with the general topic of early_sanitize to prepare for the very first mmio ops." I'll add this to the commit message. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
