[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [Intel-gfx] [RFC][PATCH] gpu:drm:i915:intel_detect_pch: back to check devfn instead of check class type
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 08:30:59PM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [mailto:konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 12:42 PM > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 08:29:56AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 09:08:24PM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > > > actually I'm curious whether it's still necessary to __detect__ PCH. > > > > Could > > > > we assume a 1:1 mapping between GPU and PCH, e.g. BDW already hard > > > > code the knowledge: > > > > > > > > } else if (IS_BROADWELL(dev)) { > > > > dev_priv->pch_type = PCH_LPT; > > > > dev_priv->pch_id = > > > > > > INTEL_PCH_LPT_LP_DEVICE_ID_TYPE; > > > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("This is Broadwell, > > assuming " > > > > "LynxPoint LP PCH\n"); > > > > > > > > Or if there is real usage on non-fixed mapping (not majority), could it > > > > be a > > > > better option to have fixed mapping as a fallback instead of leaving as > > > > PCH_NONE? Then even when Qemu doesn't provide a special tweaked > > PCH, > > > > the majority case just works. > > > > > > I guess we can do it, at least I haven't seen any strange combinations in > > > the wild outside of Intel ... > > > > How big is the QA matrix for this? Would it make sense to just > > include the latest hardware (say going two generations back) > > and ignore the older one? > > suppose minimal or no QA effort on bare metal, if we only conservatively > change the fallback path which is today not supposed to function with > PCH_NONE. so it's only same amount of QA effort as whatever else is > proposed in this passthru upstreaming task. I agree no need to cover > older model, possibly just snb, ivb and hsw, but will leave Tiejun to answer > the overall goal. Yeah, I'd be ok with the approach of using defaults if we can't recognize the pch - if anyone screams we can either quirk or figure something else out. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |