From: "Chauhan, Shekhar" <shekhar.chauhan@intel.com>
To: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Cc: Matt Atwood <matthew.s.atwood@intel.com>,
<intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Haridhar Kalvala <haridhar.kalvala@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] drm/xe/xe3: Define Xe3 feature flags
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 23:58:32 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2c8efac2-ce0f-4366-9fec-d5eb5dc5f669@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241008180609.GT5725@mdroper-desk1.amr.corp.intel.com>
On 10/8/2024 23:36, Matt Roper wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 11:19:55PM +0530, Chauhan, Shekhar wrote:
>> On 10/8/2024 21:45, Matt Roper wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 07:53:00AM +0530, Chauhan, Shekhar wrote:
>>>> On 10/8/2024 7:05, Matt Atwood wrote:
>>>>> From: Haridhar Kalvala <haridhar.kalvala@intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Define a common set of Xe3 feature flags and definitions that will be
>>>>> used for all platforms in this family.
>>>>>
>>>>> The feature flags are inherited unchanged from the Xe2 (XE2_FEATURES)
>>>>> platform.
>>>>>
>>>>> Following B-spec details inherited from Xe2 feature flag definition
>>>>> commit.
>>>>>
>>>>> v2: reuse graphics_xe2 defintion
>>>> The patch itself LGTM, but since we're re-using Xe3_LPM with media_xe2, I
>>>> believe we can have a v3: Reuse media_xe2 definition. Also, there's a typo
>>> That wasn't a v3 change; this patch has been using media_xe2 since its
>>> original version.
>> I meant with the v3 being sent and then there were back and forth changes,
>> might as well document them.
> Yeah, but the media definition isn't something that ever changed here,
> only the graphics definition. The changelog generally just indicates
> what's different since the previous revision of the patch that was sent
> out.
Got it.
>
>>>> in the above graphics_xe2 'definition'.
>>>> Both of these are minor things which can be addressed while applying, so,
>>>> with that,
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
>>> I think you copy-pasted my r-b here by accident?
>> Ah, nope. Your review did most of the work, mine was an overview.
>> Henceforth, I didn't mean to "take" it away. I've done something similar on
>> the other patches as well in this series, where most of the review was done
>> by you, but then I had a final look over it.
>> Let me know if this isn't allowed, i.e., having 2 reviewers for a patch.
> Generally every r-b line is an indication that the person has fully
> reviewed the patch and approves it for merging. If someone raised
> concerns on an earlier version, but then doesn't have time to re-visit
> the updated patch, it's not really appropriate to put their r-b there
> since they haven't confirmed that the fixes are correct (credit for
> their review feedback is usually given in the change log as "v2: fix foo
> (Matt)." It's fine for someone other than the first reviewer to to do
> the final review of the patch as you did here, but then only the final
> reviewer's r-b should be included unless the first reviewer also has
> time to come back and check it themselves too.
Okay. Will keep this in mind!
>
>
> Matt
>
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Shekhar Chauhan <shekhar.chauhan@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>>> Bspec: 58695
>>>>> - dma_mask_size remains 46 (not documented in bspec)
>>>>> - supports_usm=1 (Bspec 59651)
>>>>> - has_flatccs=1 (Bspec 58797)
>>>>> - has_4tile=1 (Bspec 58788)
>>>>> - has_asid=1 (Bspec 59654, 59265, 60288)
>>>>> - has_range_tlb_invalidate=1 (Bspec 71126)
>>>>> - five-level page table (Bspec 59505)
>>>>> - 1 VD + 1 VE + 1 SFC (Bspec 67103, 70819)
>>>>> - platform engine mask (Bspec 60149)
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Haridhar Kalvala <haridhar.kalvala@intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Matt Atwood <matthew.s.atwood@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c | 5 ++++-
>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
>>>>> index 7ffee06fab13..2139edba9062 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
>>>>> @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ static const struct xe_media_desc media_xelpmp = {
>>>>> };
>>>>> static const struct xe_media_desc media_xe2 = {
>>>>> - .name = "Xe2_LPM / Xe2_HPM",
>>>>> + .name = "Xe2_LPM / Xe2_HPM / Xe3_LPM",
>>>>> .hw_engine_mask =
>>>>> GENMASK(XE_HW_ENGINE_VCS7, XE_HW_ENGINE_VCS0) |
>>>>> GENMASK(XE_HW_ENGINE_VECS3, XE_HW_ENGINE_VECS0) |
>>>>> @@ -360,6 +360,8 @@ static const struct gmdid_map graphics_ip_map[] = {
>>>>> { 1274, &graphics_xelpg }, /* Xe_LPG+ */
>>>>> { 2001, &graphics_xe2 },
>>>>> { 2004, &graphics_xe2 },
>>>>> + { 3000, &graphics_xe2 },
>>>>> + { 3001, &graphics_xe2 },
>>>>> };
>>>>> /* Map of GMD_ID values to media IP */
>>>>> @@ -367,6 +369,7 @@ static const struct gmdid_map media_ip_map[] = {
>>>>> { 1300, &media_xelpmp },
>>>>> { 1301, &media_xe2 },
>>>>> { 2000, &media_xe2 },
>>>>> + { 3000, &media_xe2 },
>>>>> };
>>>>> #define INTEL_VGA_DEVICE(id, info) { \
>>>> --
>>>> -shekhar
>>>>
>> --
>> -shekhar
>>
--
-shekhar
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-08 18:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-08 1:35 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Add Xe3 and Panther Lake support Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 1/6] drm/xe/xe3: Xe3 uses the same PAT settings as Xe2 Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 2/6] drm/xe/xe3: Define Xe3 feature flags Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 2:23 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 16:15 ` Matt Roper
2024-10-08 17:49 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 18:06 ` Matt Roper
2024-10-08 18:28 ` Chauhan, Shekhar [this message]
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 3/6] drm/xe/xe3: Add initial set of workarounds Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 13:46 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 16:17 ` Matt Roper
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 4/6] drm/xe/ptl: PTL re-uses Xe2 MOCS table Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 13:19 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 5/6] drm/xe/ptl: Add PTL platform definition Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 13:25 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 6/6] drm/xe/xe3lpm: Add new "instance0" steering table Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 1:40 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Add Xe3 and Panther Lake support (rev3) Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:40 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:41 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:53 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:56 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:58 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 2:23 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 10:01 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork
2024-10-08 16:26 ` Matt Roper
2024-10-08 16:08 ` [PATCH 0/6 v3] Add Xe3 and Panther Lake support Matt Roper
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-10-04 22:05 [PATCH 0/6] " Matt Atwood
2024-10-04 22:05 ` [PATCH 2/6] drm/xe/xe3: Define Xe3 feature flags Matt Atwood
2024-10-04 22:40 ` Matt Roper
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=2c8efac2-ce0f-4366-9fec-d5eb5dc5f669@intel.com \
--to=shekhar.chauhan@intel.com \
--cc=haridhar.kalvala@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.s.atwood@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.