On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 01:21:19PM +0000, Damien Lespiau wrote: > On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 02:33:48PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 07:59:10PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > > Implements a required workaround whose implications aren't entirely clear to me > > > from the description. In particular I do not know if this effects legacy > > > contexts, execlists, or both. > > > > > > I couldn't find a real workaround name, so I made up: > > > WaHdcCtxNonCoherent > > > > I don't think we want to make up w/a names. Might cause someone to > > conclude that the w/a is no longer needed if they can't find the > > name in the w/a database or bspec. So maybe just add a small quote from > > bspec, or leave it without explanation forcing people to check bspec > > if they want to find out why it's there. > > > > I suppose one option would be to add a private namespace for our made > > up w/a names. But I don't really see a point in making up w/a names > > if we don't have a some documentation telling people what those names > > actually mean. > > > > So with the made up w/a name removed: > > Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > If you want to believe my version, it's called WaForceContextSaveRestoreNonCoherent > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2015-January/059086.html > If you reorder the defines as I did, it's Reviewed-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxx> It really irks me that the defines are out of place. Or you can send the v2 of my patch :D _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
