Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Gen9 HW whitelist and Preemption WA patches

Chris Wilson
2016-01-21T15:17:27Z

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 02:00:39PM +0000, Arun Siluvery wrote:
> Resending all patches as told by Daniel because I didn't use correct
> message-id while replying updated version of Patch1 before which means
> patchwork won't pickup and we won't have CI results. Previous updates
> regarding Patch1 are available at https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/70527/
>
> Some of the WA patches are now reviewed so I added r-b tags for them.
>
> Reviewed: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6
> Updated: 4 (to address review comment)
> To be reviewed: 4, 7, 8
>
> Arun Siluvery (8):
> drm/i915/gen9: Add framework to whitelist specific GPU registers
> drm/i915/gen9: Add GEN8_CS_CHICKEN1 to HW whitelist
> drm/i915/gen9: Add HDC_CHICKEN1 to HW whitelist
> drm/i915/bxt: Add GEN9_CS_DEBUG_MODE1 to HW whitelist
> drm/i915/bxt: Add GEN8_L3SQCREG4 to HW whitelist
> drm/i915/skl: Add GEN8_L3SQCREG4 to HW whitelist
> drm/i915/skl: Enable Per context Preemption granularity control
> drm/i915/gen9: Add WaOCLCoherentLineFlush

With bland changelogs, it is impossible to assess the severity of the
issues being addressed. How many of these do we need to apply to kernel
release to address potential user impact? Which do backporters need?
Are they critical stability fixes or power tuning or enabling for future
features?
-Chris

--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre