From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out the HWSTAM missed irq
	workaround
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:58:04 +0100
Message-ID: <20120110075804.GA3979@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1325702445-2231-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<1325801514-2129-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<86hb04bkog.fsf@sumi.keithp.com>
	<20120109233952.GJ3723@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<8662gkb96e.fsf@sumi.keithp.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com
	[209.85.212.177])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51A59E7E4
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Mon,  9 Jan 2012 23:56:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by wibhq15 with SMTP id hq15so4284428wib.36
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Mon, 09 Jan 2012 23:56:25 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8662gkb96e.fsf@sumi.keithp.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 06:09:13PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> We could leave the code for spinning in place and simply control that
> with a module parameter. That would allow us to disable it now, and if
> we find problems (or are particularly paranoid) we could disable it
> before 3.3 ships with a 1-line patch.

Well, if you want to push it through fixes (I don't think it's too late
yet for such games) I agree that we want to keep around the spinning
workaround with a module option.

As Chris pointed out when submitting his rfc patch, we've now scored
missed irq issues on ivb, snb and some gen3 chips. So it looks like this
would be generally useful infrastructure. But in the case that we keep it
I have some pending review-comments on what's currently in ... ;-)

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48