Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

From: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 11:09:49 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150625080949.GN14570@boom> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150618101013.GE24012@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:10:13AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> These are static routing, but called fairly often. (Often enough that
> you care to only read the register once.) Any reason not to preserve
> these routing tables in dev_priv or, slightly more preferrable, intel_dp?

Looking over this a bit, I realise that Broxton suffers from the same
problem, *but* uses a different struct.  I think it'd be best to leave
things the way they are for the time being and try to come up with a
good solution that would work for both platforms without introducing
separate struct pointers to dev_priv (intel_dp while logically the
better option, is trickier to use from intel_ddi, since the function
that would set this up doesn't use intel_dp currently).

Opinions?

Kind regards, David
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx