On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 02:51:47PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> On ti, 2015-05-05 at 15:24 +0100, Nick Hoath wrote:
> > On 29/04/2015 13:26, Deak, Imre wrote:
> > > On pe, 2015-04-10 at 13:12 +0100, Nick Hoath wrote:
> > >> Signed-off-by: Nick Hoath <nicholas.hoath@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >> ---
> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 1 +
> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 7 +++++++
> > >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > >> index 91eef06..d34432b 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > >> @@ -6318,6 +6318,7 @@ enum skl_disp_power_wells {
> > >> #define GEN7_HALF_SLICE_CHICKEN1_GT2 0xf100
> > >> #define GEN7_MAX_PS_THREAD_DEP (8<<12)
> > >> #define GEN7_SINGLE_SUBSCAN_DISPATCH_ENABLE (1<<10)
> > >> +#define GEN7_SBE_SS_CACHE_DISPATCH_PORT_SHARING_DISABLE (1<<4)
> > >> #define GEN7_PSD_SINGLE_PORT_DISPATCH_ENABLE (1<<3)
> > >>
> > >> #define GEN9_HALF_SLICE_CHICKEN5 0xe188
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> > >> index 5aad253..eebee73 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> > >> @@ -1047,6 +1047,13 @@ static int bxt_init_workarounds(struct intel_engine_cs *ring)
> > >> WA_SET_BIT_MASKED(GEN8_ROW_CHICKEN,
> > >> STALL_DOP_GATING_DISABLE);
> > >>
> > >> + /* WaDisableSbeCacheDispatchPortSharing:bxt */
> > >> + if (INTEL_REVID(dev) <= BXT_REVID_B0) {
> > >> + WA_SET_BIT_MASKED(
> > >> + GEN7_HALF_SLICE_CHICKEN1,
> > >> + GEN7_SBE_SS_CACHE_DISPATCH_PORT_SHARING_DISABLE);
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >
> > > This looks ok, but according to the WA DB it should also be added for
> > > SKL (<=F0) in gen9_init_workarounds.
> > >
> >
> > That would work against the concept of keeping these patches as
> > bisectable as possible - Enabling these WAs for other SoCs should be
> > done as another patch/patchset.
>
> Ok, agreed about bisectability. But it's worth adding a code comment
> about SKL or at least mention it in the commit log, so we know we have
> to follow up on it. Also I'd still put this to gen9_init_workarounds
> with a platform check, since you'll need to move it there anyway and so
> you could reduce the diff of the follow-up patch. Either way this is:
>
> Reviewed-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx>
Queued for -next, thanks for the patch. Imre, can you please supply the
skl versions of these?
Cheers, Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
