2014-10-03 15:46 GMT-03:00 Paulo Zanoni <przanoni@xxxxxxxxx>: > 2014-10-03 15:40 GMT-03:00 Paulo Zanoni <przanoni@xxxxxxxxx>: >> 2014-10-01 17:36 GMT-03:00 Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx>: >>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 08:04:12PM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: >>>> A few reasons why I'd like to do that: >>>> >>>> - IS_ULT() started as a HSW-only macro but has grown to mean IS_BDW_ULT/ULX >>>> as well. That means a few usages of IS_ULT() were slightly out of place >>>> (because we really meant checking for IS_HSW_ULT()). >>>> >>>> - Being a ULT/ULX package doesn't mean anything specific in term of >>>> functionnality when looking across HSW/BDW/SKL, it's more about the TDP of >>>> that SKU. So it doesn't make a lot of sense to continue growing IS_ULT() to >>>> encompass SKL. >>>> >>>> - The SPT detection code was using IS_ULT() for consistency with HSW and >>>> then, because the current IS_ULT() macro didn't know about SKL, we were >>>> triggering a warning. We now know that the pairing is a 1:1 relationship >>>> between the ULT/ULX SKUs and the LP PCHs, so we don't strickly need this >>>> check there and there's nothing needing a ULT/ULX check on SKL at the >>>> moment, so just discarded it in the PCH detection code. >> >> As far as I know (and as far as our WARNs inside intel_detect_pch() >> have checked), the whole CPU/PCH pairing is a static thing. Can't we >> try to kill the whole intel_detect_pch(), and change the HAS_PCH_FOO >> macros to just check the PCI IDs or something like that? > > Also, we could just check at the FUSE_STRAP bits to see if things are > ULT or not. Also, for the whole series: Reviewed-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > >> >>> >>> On the topic of ditching useless IS_FOO macros: For gen5+ the >>> intel_info->is_mobile is similarly meaningless. Someone bored could make >>> sure that we really don't have any pointless IS_MOBILE checks on those >>> platforms and then garbage-collect all the intel_info structs. >>> -Daniel >>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Damien >>>> >>>> Damien Lespiau (6): >>>> drm/i915: Use IS_HSW_ULT() in a HSW specific code path >>>> drm/i915: Use IS_HSW_ULT() in HAS_IPS() >>>> drm/i915: Spell out IS_HSW/BDW_ULT() in intel_crt_present() >>>> drm/i915: Use IS_HSW_ULT() in HSW CDCLK clock read-out >>>> drm/i915/skl: Don't check for ULT/ULX when detecting the PCH >>>> drm/i915: Remove IS_ULT() >>>> >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 6 ++---- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 3 +-- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c | 2 +- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 2 +- >>>> 4 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 1.8.3.1 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Intel-gfx mailing list >>>> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx >>> >>> -- >>> 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> Paulo Zanoni > > > > -- > Paulo Zanoni -- Paulo Zanoni _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
