Re: [PATCH 10/10] [v2] drm/i915: Add a pipeless ivybridge configuration

[Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>]

On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:42:33PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 11:17:55AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > FIXME: This is based on some HW being used for a demo. We should
> > probably wait until we have confirmation on the IDs before upstreaming
> > this patch.
> 
> I don't mind too much if we need to fixup the device after the fact, but
> checking whether this is the shipping configuration shouldn't hurt.
> 
> More important is probably whether there's any quanta platform with the
> same sdev/svendor ids without a fused pch. In that case I guess we need to
> check for something else (maybe some fuse flags in the pch?).

I highly doubt it, but I don't know how to prove it. From what I gather
on the internet and parsing through the limited uses in the kernel
today, the subvendor/subdevice is unique.

> 
> Anyway, I've done a pretty careful review of everything, mostly looking to
> reduce the impact of this feature on our code. So if you respin and
> quickly test this on an real ivb (just for paranoia) and the special box
> I'll merge it right away. Imo the maintenance burned is really small, so
> I'm not against merging this in the demo stage.

I've rebased on nightly and tried to apply all the requests (assuming I
didn't miss any). Because I am at home today, and testing displayless at
home is sort of a pain, this is untested on both regular IVB (the rebase
did have a conflict), and the Quanta server.

I can test it on regular IVB tomorrow, and I'll begin trying to get it
tested on the Quanta thing ASAP, but it could be a few days. Meanwhile,
I've pushed the respun patches here:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~bwidawsk/drm-intel/log/?h=pch_displayless

> 
> Cheers, Daniel

Thanks for the review.
[snip]

> -- 
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch

-- 
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center