Re: [PATCH v8 1/1] drm/i915/bxt: Check BIOS RC6 setup before enabling RC6

[Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>]

On ma, 2016-02-08 at 11:19 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Feb 2016, Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> wrote:
> > On la, 2016-02-06 at 00:13 +0530, Sagar Arun Kamble wrote:
> > > RC6 setup is shared between BIOS and Driver. BIOS sets up subset
> > > of
> > > RC6
> > > setup registers. If those are not setup Driver should not enable
> > > RC6.
> > > For implementing this, driver can check RC_CTRL0 and RC_CTRL1
> > > values
> > > to know if BIOS has enabled HW/SW RC6.
> > > This will also enable user to control RC6 using BIOS settings
> > > alone.
> > > RC6 related instability can be avoided by disabling via BIOS
> > > settings
> > > till driver fixes it.
> > > 
> > > v2: Had placed logic in gen8 function by mistake. Fixed it.
> > > Ensuring RPM is not enabled in case BIOS disabled RC6.
> > > 
> > > v3: Need to disable RPM if RC6 is disabled due to BIOS settings.
> > > (Daniel)
> > > Runtime PM enabling happens before gen9_enable_rc6.
> > > Moved the updation of enable_rc6 parameter in
> > > intel_uncore_sanitize.
> > > 
> > > v4: Added elaborate check for BIOS RC6 setup. Prepared check_pctx
> > > for
> > > bxt.
> > >     (Imre)
> > > 
> > > v5: Caching reserved stolen base and size in the driver private
> > > data.
> > >     Reorganized RC6 setup check. Moved from gen9_enable_rc6 to
> > >     intel_uncore_sanitize. (Imre)
> > > 
> > > v6: Rebasing on the patch submitted by Imre that moves
> > > gem_init_stolen
> > >     earlier in the load.
> > > 
> > > v7: Removed PWRCTX_MAXCNT_VCSUNIT1 check as it applies to SKL.
> > > (Imre)
> > > 
> > > v8: Fixed formatting and checkpatch issues. Fixed functional
> > > issue
> > > where
> > >     RC6 ctx size check was missing. (Imre)
> > > 
> > > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> > 
> > Thanks for the patch, I pushed it to -dinq.
> 
> The rule is, we should wait for the CI results before pushing.

Yes, I forgot to wait for the result for this version of the patch,
thanks for pointing it out. As a side-note the CI result still didn't
show up, what to do in that case? Resend the patch after a day or so?

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