Hi Dave,
Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c between commit b68362278af9
("drm/i915: More cautious with pch fifo underruns") from the
drm-intel-fixes tree and commit a72e4c9f9a11 ("drm/i915: Use dev_priv
in public intel_fifo_underrun.c functions") from the drm tree.
I fixed it up (I used the drm tree version) and can carry the fix as
necessary (no action is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c between commit b68362278af9
> ("drm/i915: More cautious with pch fifo underruns") from the
> drm-intel-fixes tree and commit a72e4c9f9a11 ("drm/i915: Use dev_priv
> in public intel_fifo_underrun.c functions") from the drm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I used the drm tree version) and can carry the fix as
> necessary (no action is required).
b68362278af9 removes two lines of code; these should be removed in the
resolved version too.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
Hi Jani,
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 10:24:12 +0200 Jani Nikula <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 03 Dec 2014, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c between commit b68362278af9
> > ("drm/i915: More cautious with pch fifo underruns") from the
> > drm-intel-fixes tree and commit a72e4c9f9a11 ("drm/i915: Use dev_priv
> > in public intel_fifo_underrun.c functions") from the drm tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I used the drm tree version) and can carry the fix as
> > necessary (no action is required).
>
> b68362278af9 removes two lines of code; these should be removed in the
> resolved version too.
Thanks for the correction. I will do that tomorrow.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
On Fri, 05 Jun 2015, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c between commit 4f47c99a9be7 ("drm/i915:
> Move WaBarrierPerformanceFixDisable:skl to skl code from chv code") from the
> drm-intel-fixes tree and commit b62adbd1ea1f ("drm/i915/bxt: Move
> WaForceEnableNonCoherent to Skylake only") from the drm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
Our tree seems to have the if blocks the other way round. I don't think
it matters, but Ville, Damien, chime in if you think it does.
BR
Jani.
>
> cheers
>
> diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> index 005b5e04de4d,d934f857394d..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> @@@ -1017,13 -1030,17 +1023,24 @@@ static int skl_init_workarounds(struct
> WA_SET_BIT_MASKED(HIZ_CHICKEN,
> BDW_HIZ_POWER_COMPILER_CLOCK_GATING_DISABLE);
>
> + if (INTEL_REVID(dev) == SKL_REVID_C0 ||
> + INTEL_REVID(dev) == SKL_REVID_D0)
> + /* WaBarrierPerformanceFixDisable:skl */
> + WA_SET_BIT_MASKED(HDC_CHICKEN0,
> + HDC_FENCE_DEST_SLM_DISABLE |
> + HDC_BARRIER_PERFORMANCE_DISABLE);
> +
> + if (INTEL_REVID(dev) <= SKL_REVID_D0) {
> + /*
> + *Use Force Non-Coherent whenever executing a 3D context. This
> + * is a workaround for a possible hang in the unlikely event
> + * a TLB invalidation occurs during a PSD flush.
> + */
> + /* WaForceEnableNonCoherent:skl */
> + WA_SET_BIT_MASKED(HDC_CHICKEN0,
> + HDC_FORCE_NON_COHERENT);
> + }
> +
> return skl_tune_iz_hashing(ring);
> }
>
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
Hi Jani,
On Fri, 05 Jun 2015 11:03:20 +0300 Jani Nikula <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 05 Jun 2015, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c between commit 4f47c99a9be7 ("drm/i915:
> > Move WaBarrierPerformanceFixDisable:skl to skl code from chv code") from the
> > drm-intel-fixes tree and commit b62adbd1ea1f ("drm/i915/bxt: Move
> > WaForceEnableNonCoherent to Skylake only") from the drm tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> > is required).
>
> Our tree seems to have the if blocks the other way round. I don't think
> it matters, but Ville, Damien, chime in if you think it does.
I have switched them around today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]