On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 09:15 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 02:01:05PM +0530, sourab.gupta@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Akash Goel <akash.goel@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Added a new rendering specific Workaround 'WaTlbInvalidateStoreDataBefore'.
> > This workaround has to be applied before doing TLB Invalidation.
> > In this WA, before pipecontrol with TLB invalidate set, need to add 2 MI
> > Store data commands.
> > Without this, hardware cannot guarantee the command after the PIPE_CONTROL
> > with TLB inv will not use the old TLB values.
> >
> > v2: Modified the WA comment (Ville)
> >
> > v3: Added the vlv identifier with WA name (Damien)
> >
> > v4: Reworked based on Chris' comments (WA moved to gen7 ring flush func,
> > sending 6 dwords instead of 8) (Chris)
> >
> > v5: Enhancing the scope of WA to gen6, gen7. Having a common WA func being
> > called from gen6, gen7 flush functions. (Ville)
> >
> > @@ -1733,6 +1771,13 @@ static int gen6_bsd_ring_flush(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
> > uint32_t cmd;
> > int ret;
> >
> > + /* Apply WaTlbInvalidateStoreDataBefore workaround */
> > + if (invalidate) {
> > + ret = gen6_tlb_invalidate_wa(ring);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + }
>
> BSD uses MI_FLUSH_DW. Does this w/a still apply? Do we need it for BLT
> as well? VEBOX?
> -Chris
>
This should be applicable only to the render ring funcs, not the bsd,
blt, vebox ones, as you called out. PIPE_CONTROL is used only in render
ring, others use MI_FLUSH. My bad for missing this out.
Thanks,
Sourab
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
