From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wilson Subject: Re: enabling forcewake from userspace Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 07:11:55 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1301105269-23970-1-git-send-email-ben@bwidawsk.net> <20110326022358.GA24223@lundgren.kumite> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 530699E74F for ; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 00:11:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110326022358.GA24223@lundgren.kumite> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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 , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:58 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > The only other option floating around is IOCTLs to read/write the > registers, which previously seemed like a bad idea, but is now looking > like the only option. The lazy option is to cross your fingers and do the forced-wake from userspace debug tools. I'm not exactly wild about the idea, but it does cut down on the number of blessed interfaces for touching hardware. The other option is to continue to extend the debugfs to print out groups of registers of interest. Maybe this would be a good addition to the i915_*_ringbuffer_info? An ioctl does seem to be a better longterm solution. But maybe we can ignore the problem for a few more years? ;-) -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre