From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] quick_dump: A dump utility different
 than reg_dumper
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:51:01 +0200
Message-ID: <20120926115101.GC1980@bremse>
References: <1348256765-1611-1-git-send-email-ben@bwidawsk.net>
	<20120922180504.GA6800@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<617390e2a10e9c1fd7682455538f9659@bwidawsk.net>
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-lb0-f177.google.com (mail-lb0-f177.google.com
	[209.85.217.177])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D435F9E776
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Wed, 26 Sep 2012 04:51:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbbgi11 with SMTP id gi11so838117lbb.36
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Wed, 26 Sep 2012 04:51:05 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <617390e2a10e9c1fd7682455538f9659@bwidawsk.net>
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: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 01:58:37PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-09-22 11:05, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >And a quick comment on your approach here: I'm not too sure
> >whether the
> >file-base register block approach scales, respectively why exactly
> >this is
> >better than frobbing the reg_dumper tool. Since that one has the
> >concept
> >of register blocks already, too.
> 
> It doesn't scale. It scales better than reg_dumper was my goal and
> point (IMO).
> 
> The exact problem that was trying to be solved is Valleyview (and I
> assure you there will be more such products coming). Valleyview took
> a huge chunk of well known registers, and changed their offsets.
> Modifying this in reg dumper is of course possible, but it's
> tedious. I wanted to have easy to modify text files with an easy
> python front end (the offsets could even be applied in the script
> extremely easily).

If the issue is just the base-address moving around, I think we could
solve that with some refactoring ...
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch