Re: [PATCH 00/10] drm/i915: Some less complex FBC fixes

["Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>]

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 03:35:42PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 03:33:32PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 08:59:49PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:47:59PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 04:49:07PM +0200, ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com wrote:
> > > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Since fixing the FBC locking is a bigger task that will take a while,
> > > > > I decided to pull all the simple fixes from my branch and post them
> > > > > right away.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Some of these I've posted before, some others have seen a bit of action
> > > > > by being in a public branch.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The FBC_FENCE_OFF change is just a guess at this point. The odd offset
> > > > > just caught my eye while reading throguh i915_reg.h.
> > > > 
> > > > I didn't spot anything offensive in the series and each patch only does
> > > > what it says on the tin. So I am going to stick my neck out and say
> > > > 
> > > > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > > 
> > > > for the series. Being picky, I guess Fix FBC_FENCE_OFF should only be an
> > > > acked-by since we have no way to review it...
> > > 
> > > Entire series merged, and I'll fire up my g4x here to see what happens ;-)
> > 
> > Hm, seems to fail on my g4x when I enable fbc. This is on latest -nightly:
> 
> Also, shouldn't we enable fbc now on all gen5+ machines? Or is there still
> something outstanding to fix issues? Atm we only have it enabled on
> haswell :(

The render tracking bits are still broken. And the locking is crap. I
started to fix it for real, but it turned out to be a fair amount of
work, so I figured I'll get back to it after I've cleared out some other
stuff from my desk.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC