On 05/05/2015 17:18, Deak, Imre wrote:
On ti, 2015-05-05 at 15:20 +0100, Nick Hoath wrote:
On 29/04/2015 15:35, Deak, Imre wrote:
On pe, 2015-03-20 at 09:29 +0000, Nick Hoath wrote:
This stepping isn't listed separately in the specs, so needs confirmation.
Signed-off-by: Nick Hoath <nicholas.hoath@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
index eec271a..68fb41a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
@@ -2329,6 +2329,7 @@ struct drm_i915_cmd_table {
#define SKL_REVID_E0 (0x4)
#define BXT_REVID_A0 (0x0)
+#define BXT_REVID_A1 (0x1)
The above mapping is for the SOC RevID, but I think for all our purposes
(WAs) we should check the GT/Display RevID. The A1 GT/Display RevID
doesn't seem to exist, only A0 is defined with all of 0,1,2 RevIDs
mapping to A0.
We use the GT Device2 Revision ID for these comparisons, which does
change on each SoC revision. This may map to A0 GT stepping for all the
Ax SoCs, according to the specs. However, as this is a naming convention
that doesn't affect the code, I suggest we stick to what I have in this
patch even if it doesn't 100% reflect what's in the specs.
Not sure about this, as I understand all the workarounds are marked with
the GT stepping not the SOC stepping, even though the latter is more
fine-grained. Is there any workarounds for A1? If not I'd suggest adding
this macro only when we need it.
Agreed, consider this patch currently N/A.
--Imre
#define BXT_REVID_B0 (0x3)
#define BXT_REVID_C0 (0x6)
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
