Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: add function for GT related workarounds

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 25/01/2016 17:10, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:42PM +0000, Arun Siluvery wrote:
On 25/01/2016 16:17, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 02:43:06PM +0000, Gore, Tim wrote:


Tim Gore
Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd. - Co. Reg. #1134945 - Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ


-----Original Message-----
From: Mika Kuoppala [mailto:mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 2:39 PM
To: Gore, Tim; intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Gore, Tim; arun.siluvery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: add function for GT related workarounds

tim.gore@xxxxxxxxx writes:

From: Tim Gore <tim.gore@xxxxxxxxx>

Add a function that is a place for workarounds that are GT related but
not required per ring. This function is called on driver load and also
after a reset and on resume, so it is safe for workarounds that get
clobbered in these situations.

Signed-off-by: Tim Gore <tim.gore@xxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 12 ++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
index 7377b67..fe960d5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
@@ -2132,6 +2132,16 @@ static void i915_address_space_init(struct
i915_address_space *vm,
  	list_add_tail(&vm->global_link, &dev_priv->vm_list);  }

+void gtt_write_workarounds(struct drm_device *dev) {

static void

This can be squashed with 2/3.

-Mika

Do you mean all squashed together, into a single patch?

I would. They are all setting the same register to a nominal value, for
the same purpose.

Don't we normally split WA into individual patches or is this only
for this WA?

Is it not the same w/a applied to different generations? You either
split it per device, so that a bisect + revert only affects one machine,
or not all. Choose your poison.

yes but the value programmed is different for each device.

I think as Mika suggested, squashing 1, 2 which covers gen8 and another patch for gen9 is a good split.

regards
Arun


-Chris


_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux