From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] drm/i915: Restore ILK powerctx pin
 attributes
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 10:58:57 -0700
Message-ID: <20130715175857.GB30242@bwidawsk.net>
References: <1373818974-23102-1-git-send-email-ben@bwidawsk.net>
	<1373818974-23102-9-git-send-email-ben@bwidawsk.net>
	<20130715103015.GB32386@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from shiva.localdomain (unknown [209.20.75.48])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5710DE5F6E
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Mon, 15 Jul 2013 10:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130715103015.GB32386@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=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: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, Intel GFX <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:30:15AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 09:22:52AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > Now that I've killed renderctx, and the ILK pm code no longer has
> > anything shared with the regular i915 context code, make the pin
> > arguments the same as how they were before I started.
> > 
> > I do not know the reason for the original pin arguments, so it's totally
> > possible this commit isn't necessary (and conversely that I temporarily
> > broke things earlier in the patch series; though I saw no such result).
> > However, since ILK RC6 worked very well for those of us where it worked,
> > I think messing with any of the code is unjustified.
> 
> We should move it out of the aperture as there is no reason for this to
> be GTT accessible. That requires an extra patch to request top-down
> allocation.
> -Chris
> 
> -- 
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre

I am perfectly fine with dropping this patch, which I think solves the
problem. I see no reason to go back to a 4k aligned alloc, do you?

-- 
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center