| Message ID | 20191112092854.869-24-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [01/27] drm/i915: Flush context free work on cleanup | expand |
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes: > Be consistent in our mocs setup on Tigerlake and set the unused control > value to follow the PTE entry as we previously have done. The unused > values are beyond the defines of the ABI, the consistency simplifies our > checking. Simplifies how? > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c > index 6e881c735b20..d2b445d6c258 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c > @@ -489,7 +489,7 @@ static void intel_mocs_init_global(struct intel_gt *gt) > for (; index < table.n_entries; index++) > intel_uncore_write(uncore, > GEN12_GLOBAL_MOCS(index), > - table.table[0].control_value); > + table.table[I915_MOCS_PTE].control_value); This sets it point into reserved, so I am confused. Also the comment above and the part in generic MOCS tables will be stale. -Mika > } > > void intel_mocs_init(struct intel_gt *gt) > -- > 2.24.0 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2019-11-12 14:13:56) > Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes: > > > Be consistent in our mocs setup on Tigerlake and set the unused control > > value to follow the PTE entry as we previously have done. The unused > > values are beyond the defines of the ABI, the consistency simplifies our > > checking. > > Simplifies how? Because all platforms follow the same pattern, we only need one routine not multiples. > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c > > index 6e881c735b20..d2b445d6c258 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c > > @@ -489,7 +489,7 @@ static void intel_mocs_init_global(struct intel_gt *gt) > > for (; index < table.n_entries; index++) > > intel_uncore_write(uncore, > > GEN12_GLOBAL_MOCS(index), > > - table.table[0].control_value); > > + table.table[I915_MOCS_PTE].control_value); > > This sets it point into reserved, so I am confused. Outside of the ABI. > Also the comment above and the part in generic MOCS tables will > be stale. Look at the next pair of patches for removing most of the file, now possible because the dissimilarity is removed. -Chris
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c index 6e881c735b20..d2b445d6c258 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c @@ -489,7 +489,7 @@ static void intel_mocs_init_global(struct intel_gt *gt) for (; index < table.n_entries; index++) intel_uncore_write(uncore, GEN12_GLOBAL_MOCS(index), - table.table[0].control_value); + table.table[I915_MOCS_PTE].control_value); } void intel_mocs_init(struct intel_gt *gt)
Be consistent in our mocs setup on Tigerlake and set the unused control value to follow the PTE entry as we previously have done. The unused values are beyond the defines of the ABI, the consistency simplifies our checking. Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_mocs.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)