From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/16] drm/i915: Add vblank based delayed
 watermark update mechanism
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 18:10:44 +0200
Message-ID: <20140604161044.GN7416@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1400770101-14277-1-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
 <1400770101-14277-8-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
 <CA+gsUGRkPVS6MGOC8uk6t_K4VBhx1PDpbTMX8Pkv9pur3XP82Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140603193229.GY27580@intel.com>
 <CA+gsUGT7NaMU_M0JU=CNVOidetAFjfKqGj=W0r9g=pMGiD8gEw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com
 [209.85.212.177])
 by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779D16E067
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Wed,  4 Jun 2014 09:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id f8so1760698wiw.16
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 09:10:49 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+gsUGT7NaMU_M0JU=CNVOidetAFjfKqGj=W0r9g=pMGiD8gEw@mail.gmail.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>
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Sender: "Intel-gfx" <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
To: Paulo Zanoni <przanoni@gmail.com>
Cc: Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:01:01AM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> > This function is only called at init/resume. It populates the software
> > state with something that matches the current hardware state. I guess
> > a comment explaning the purpose of the function is the best we can do
> > here, or do you have a better idea?
> 
> The problem is that we can use the get_hw_state functions not only to
> check driver state a init/resume, but also to do state tracking
> assertions at certain points of the code. Since most (all?) the other
> HW state readout functions don't have side-effects, there's a
> possibility that someone may add code to do HW state assertion at some
> points, and just call these things without realizing the potential
> side effects. A comment would help, but moving the assignment to
> another place would also solve the problem for me. You choose.

We already do that in other places, e.g. the edp bit depth hacks we have.
But a comment might be justified.

I haven't looked at the details here, just a high-level comment that we do
play such ugly tricks already. And I agree that it's unexpected.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch