As Ville points out, it's possible/probable we don't actually need this. Potentially, this validates the letter of the spec, and not the spirit. Ville: > I discussed this on irc w/ Ben, and I was suggesting we don't need to > poll. Polling apparently can be used as a workaround for certain > hardware issues, but it looks like those issues shouldn't affect us, > for the momemnt at least. So my suggestion was to try w/o polling > first (since there could be some power cost to polling) and add the > poll bit if problems arise. Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c index 31b1f3c..e7748ef 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c @@ -842,6 +842,7 @@ gen8_ring_sync(struct intel_ring_buffer *waiter, intel_ring_emit(waiter, MI_SEMAPHORE_WAIT | MI_SEMAPHORE_GLOBAL_GTT | + MI_SEMAPHORE_POLL | MI_SEMAPHORE_SAD_GTE_SDD); intel_ring_emit(waiter, seqno); intel_ring_emit(waiter, -- 1.9.2 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
