From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80C9410E1EF for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2023 07:20:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2023 09:20:13 +0200 Content-Language: en-US To: References: <20230627172210.4599-1-juhapekka.heikkila@gmail.com> <20230627172210.4599-3-juhapekka.heikkila@gmail.com> <41adde8f-53ce-856e-e355-8939f13988f2@intel.com> <744da5cd-3b56-1504-da6b-193e26e4c605@gmail.com> <8af0e399-4a30-c919-32c9-472539318b99@intel.com> From: Karolina Stolarek In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] lib/igt_fb: include lib/intel_blt functions to blitter path List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: igt-dev-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "igt-dev" List-ID: On 29.06.2023 18:04, Juha-Pekka Heikkila wrote: >>>>> +            blt_set_copy_object(&blt.src, src); >>>>> +            blt_set_copy_object(&blt.dst, dst); >>>>> + >>>>> +            if (HAS_FLATCCS(intel_get_drm_devid(src_fb->fd))) { >>>> >>>> This check might not be correct on some platforms. To check if we >>>> need to fill in ext part, you could do a similar check as in commit >>>> 45da871dd268 ("tests/gem_ccs: Check for extended block-copy and >>>> compression support"). >>>> >>>> +Zbigniew, what is the status of HAS_FLATCCS? How is it useful in >>>> the context of blitter copy? I believe we want to switch to using >>>> command flags, like BLT_CMD_EXTENDED? Or am I misremembering something? >>>> >>> >>> This is bit double edged situation. Even if for MTL there would be >>> added support for compression into intel_blt, all the related >>> handling for aux ccs would still not be here on igt_fb.c. For flat >>> ccs everything that is needed is now in place and for time being it >>> seems correct, everything matches. Do note this in not only >>> controlled by HAS_FLATCCS() but also by modifiers which actually >>> arrive onto this part of code. >> >> Hmm, I see, let's leave it for now and we can revisit it in the future. >> >> Thanks for answering my questions. Like I said, there are two nits >> that would be good to tidy up, but everything else looks good to me: >> >> Reviewed-by: Karolina Stolarek > > Thanks Karolina. In the mean time this patch was separated into two > parts, one where there were couple of more Xe related changes and other > where these blitting related changes. May I use this R-b here > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/544642/?series=119886&rev=4 Yes, please do > ? > > Those few alignment fixes and small adjustments I'll apply before > pushing if I will not need another ci round. I think you're good to go, the reported regressions seem unrelated to your patches. Many thanks, Karolina > > /Juha-Pekka