On 7/18/2014 7:00 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 02:04:56PM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 04:53:34PM +0530, Jindal, Sonika wrote:
On 7/18/2014 4:26 PM, Damien Lespiau wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:04:03AM +0530, sonika.jindal@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@xxxxxxxxx>
This series prepares future platform enabling by changing HAS_PCH_SPLIT to more
appropriate check since the code accessed may not have anything to do with
having PCH or not.
Hi Sonika,
HAS_PCH_SPLIT() is true for Ironlake (gen 5) as it's paired with the
Ibex Peak PCH.
In various patches, the condition needs to be INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen < 5
then.
I am sorry, my understanding was that HAS_PCH_SPLIT is equivalent to
(gen > 5 && !(IS_VALLEYVIEW) )
So, is it like, HAS_PCH_SPLIT is equivalent to (gen >=5 && !(IS_VALEYVIEW))
Yes, indeed!
Since the patches need to be respun anyway, I vote for the introduction of
HAS_GMCH_DISPLAY for the gen < 5 || IS_VLV condition. Since vlv (i.e. byt
+ chv) have essentially inherited the gmch display block from gen3/4. I
think that would help the readability of the code quite a bit.
Comments?
-Daniel
Ok, I will add this and send the patches again.
-Sonika
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
