From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Widawsky Subject: [PATCH 09/13] drm/i915/bdw: poll semaphores Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:52:36 -0700 Message-ID: <1398808360-3674-10-git-send-email-benjamin.widawsky@intel.com> References: <1398808360-3674-1-git-send-email-benjamin.widawsky@intel.com> 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 40F108A47C for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:52:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1398808360-3674-1-git-send-email-benjamin.widawsky@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: Intel GFX List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org As Ville points out, it's possible/probable we don't actually need this. Potentially, this validates the letter of the spec, and not the spirit. Ville: > I discussed this on irc w/ Ben, and I was suggesting we don't need to > poll. Polling apparently can be used as a workaround for certain > hardware issues, but it looks like those issues shouldn't affect us, > for the momemnt at least. So my suggestion was to try w/o polling > first (since there could be some power cost to polling) and add the > poll bit if problems arise. Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c index 31b1f3c..e7748ef 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c @@ -842,6 +842,7 @@ gen8_ring_sync(struct intel_ring_buffer *waiter, intel_ring_emit(waiter, MI_SEMAPHORE_WAIT | MI_SEMAPHORE_GLOBAL_GTT | + MI_SEMAPHORE_POLL | MI_SEMAPHORE_SAD_GTE_SDD); intel_ring_emit(waiter, seqno); intel_ring_emit(waiter, -- 1.9.2