On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 03:52:18PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > 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> All merged, thanks. -Daniel > > > > >> > >>> > >>> 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 -- 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
