Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 4 May 2020 09:03:14 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
        tglx@linutronix.de, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: check to see if SIMD registers are available
 before using SIMD
Message-ID: <20200504160314.GA26373@infradead.org>
References: <20200430221016.3866-1-Jason@zx2c4.com>
 <20200501180731.GA2485@infradead.org>
 <158853721918.8377.18286963845226122104@build.alporthouse.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <158853721918.8377.18286963845226122104@build.alporthouse.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 09:20:19PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Err, why does i915 implements its own uncached memcpy instead of relying
> > on core functionality to start with?
> 
> What is this core functionality that provides movntqda?

A sensible name might be memcpy_uncached or mempcy_nontemporal.
But the important point is that this should be arch code with a common
fallback rather than hacking it up in drivers.