From: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Split uncore init into vfunc setup and mmio setup
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 12:19:40 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1507540780.6297.0.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <150739012766.22232.3911590062848026277@mail.alporthouse.com>
On Sat, 2017-10-07 at 16:28 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Michal Wajdeczko (2017-10-07 12:14:30)
> > On Sat, 07 Oct 2017 10:56:58 +0200, Chris Wilson
> > > +void intel_uncore_init_mmio(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > +{
> > > + i915_check_vgpu(dev_priv);
> > > +
> > > + intel_uncore_edram_detect(dev_priv);
> > > + intel_uncore_fw_domains_init(dev_priv);
> >
> > Do you plan to split fw_domains_init into early/mmio parts?
> > Without such split use of intel_uncore_forcewake_for_reg
> > from uc_init_early will still be not possible.
>
> Ah, I was mistaken in thinking the vfunc tables were enough. We still
> have some mmio access in fw_domains_init that we need to split into
> _early and _mmio parts. On the whole, what do we think, is the motion
> still justified? I think it still is -- we have a lot of static
> information here that is useful during early setup.
Not sure if I fully understood the quesiton but the init code split
makes it more coherent across driver.
Regards, Joonas
--
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-09 9:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-07 8:56 [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Split uncore init into vfunc setup and mmio setup Chris Wilson
2017-10-07 8:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Remove early invocations of i915_engines_cleanup() Chris Wilson
2017-10-09 9:24 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2017-10-07 9:19 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915: Split uncore init into vfunc setup and mmio setup Patchwork
2017-10-07 10:21 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2017-10-07 11:14 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Michal Wajdeczko
2017-10-07 15:28 ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-09 9:19 ` Joonas Lahtinen [this message]
2017-10-09 9:23 ` Chris Wilson
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=1507540780.6297.0.camel@linux.intel.com \
--to=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=michal.wajdeczko@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox