On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:37:33AM -0700, oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx> > > This is mostly for correctness so that we know we are running the LR > context correctly (this is, the PDPs are contained inside the context > object). > > v2: Move the check to inside the enable PPGTT function. The switch > happens in two places: the legacy context switch (that we won't hit > when Execlists are enabled) and the PPGTT enable, which unfortunately > we need. This would look much nicer if the ppgtt->enable was part of > the ring init, where it logically belongs. > > Signed-off-by: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > index 8b3cde7..9f0c69e 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > @@ -844,6 +844,11 @@ static int gen8_ppgtt_enable(struct i915_hw_ppgtt *ppgtt) > if (USES_FULL_PPGTT(dev)) > continue; > > + /* In the case of Execlists, we don't want to write the PDPs > + * in the legacy way (they live inside the context now) */ > + if (intel_enable_execlists(dev)) > + return 0; Along the lines of one of Daniel's comments about the module parameter, I think we could use some clarity on when to use intel_enable_execlists() vs lrc_enabled vs i915.enable_execlists. Brad > + > ret = ppgtt->switch_mm(ppgtt, ring, true); > if (ret) > goto err_out; > -- > 1.9.0 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
