From: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Cc: Michel Thierry <michel.thierry@intel.com>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/tgl: Implement Wa_1604555607
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 08:57:26 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191122032726.GA27545@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191121182909.g2qajp2nqtrirms4@ldmartin-desk1>
On 2019-11-21 at 10:29:09 -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 04:42:31PM +0530, Ramalingam C wrote:
> > + /* Wa_1604555607:tgl */
> > + val = intel_uncore_read(engine->uncore, FF_MODE2);
> > + val &= ~FF_MODE2_TDS_TIMER_MASK;
> > + val |= FF_MODE2_TDS_TIMER_128;
> > + __wa_write_masked_or(wal, FF_MODE2, FF_MODE2_TDS_TIMER_MASK, val,
> > + IS_TGL_REVID(engine->i915, 0, TGL_REVID_A0) ? 0:
>
> isn't it broken until B0 rather than only on A0? I think we could just
> disable the read back for all revs and then selectively enable it
> for later.
Thought of excluding the verification when the new stepping comes in.
Hence excluded for existing stepping alone.
Even your suggestion sounds good to me. I will go with it. With a FIXME
Note to indicate that we need to enable for capable steppings.
-Ram
>
> Lucas De Marchi
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Cc: Michel Thierry <michel.thierry@intel.com>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/tgl: Implement Wa_1604555607
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 08:57:26 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191122032726.GA27545@intel.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20191122032726.vujt9wE6fhwGehPK70f5lRlkotTCYokKjc-uits1h0g@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191121182909.g2qajp2nqtrirms4@ldmartin-desk1>
On 2019-11-21 at 10:29:09 -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 04:42:31PM +0530, Ramalingam C wrote:
> > + /* Wa_1604555607:tgl */
> > + val = intel_uncore_read(engine->uncore, FF_MODE2);
> > + val &= ~FF_MODE2_TDS_TIMER_MASK;
> > + val |= FF_MODE2_TDS_TIMER_128;
> > + __wa_write_masked_or(wal, FF_MODE2, FF_MODE2_TDS_TIMER_MASK, val,
> > + IS_TGL_REVID(engine->i915, 0, TGL_REVID_A0) ? 0:
>
> isn't it broken until B0 rather than only on A0? I think we could just
> disable the read back for all revs and then selectively enable it
> for later.
Thought of excluding the verification when the new stepping comes in.
Hence excluded for existing stepping alone.
Even your suggestion sounds good to me. I will go with it. With a FIXME
Note to indicate that we need to enable for capable steppings.
-Ram
>
> Lucas De Marchi
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-22 3:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-21 10:12 [PATCH 0/1] Wa_1604555607 implementation and verification skip Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 10:12 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 10:12 ` [PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/tgl: Implement Wa_1604555607 Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 10:12 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 10:19 ` Chris Wilson
2019-11-21 10:19 ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2019-11-21 10:51 ` Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 10:51 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 10:19 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2019-11-21 10:19 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2019-11-21 11:12 ` Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 11:12 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 18:29 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-11-21 18:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Lucas De Marchi
2019-11-22 3:27 ` Ramalingam C [this message]
2019-11-22 3:27 ` Ramalingam C
2019-11-21 14:32 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Wa_1604555607 implementation and verification skip (rev5) Patchwork
2019-11-21 14:32 ` [Intel-gfx] " Patchwork
2019-11-21 15:03 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2019-11-21 15:03 ` [Intel-gfx] " Patchwork
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-11-22 4:02 [PATCH 0/1] Wa_1604555607 implementation and verification skip Ramalingam C
2019-11-22 4:02 ` [PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/tgl: Implement Wa_1604555607 Ramalingam C
2019-11-22 9:21 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2019-11-22 9:29 ` Chris Wilson
2019-11-26 8:00 ` Ramalingam C
2019-11-26 9:38 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-11-26 10:10 ` Ramalingam C
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191122032726.GA27545@intel.com \
--to=ramalingam.c@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=michel.thierry@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.