From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
To: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
Cc: janusz.krzysztofik@intel.com, matthew.d.roper@intel.com,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt@intel.com>,
chris.p.wilson@linux.intel.com, nirmoy.das@intel.com
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 1/4] drm/i915: Add GuC TLB Invalidation pci tags
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 21:47:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZR3BNSzY3IAFXHXj@ashyti-mobl2.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZR273PIRDhFHmfgc@ashyti-mobl2.lan>
> > > > Add pci (device info) tags for if GuC TLB Invalidation is enabled.
> > > > Since GuC based TLB invalidation is only strictly necessary for MTL
> > > > resently, only enable GuC based TLB invalidations for MTL.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt@intel.com>
> > > Jani was mentioning that the pci tags is not a proper title.
> > >
> > > No need to resend, I think I will merge this series, so that, if
> > > you agree, I can change /pci tags/pci flag/ before pushing.
> > Have all the review comments been addressed? Surely it can't be pushed until
> > it has at least an ack from everyone who has expressed concerns about the
> > changes?
and... of course... I won't push it until all the reviews and
acks are in place... I just wanted to save Jonathan a v6 just for
this change if, in a furtunate case, there won't be other
reviews.
Andi
> this particular patch did not receive any comment so far, except
> for the "pci tags" from Jani.
>
> This solution was somehow hinted by Tvrtko in one of the previous
> review, I guess.
>
> Personally I think that having a pci flag just for this is a bit
> of an overkill, but I don't have a strong opinion about it.
>
> Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-04 19:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-04 18:36 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 1/4] drm/i915: Add GuC TLB Invalidation pci tags Jonathan Cavitt
2023-10-04 18:36 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 2/4] drm/i915: Define and use GuC and CTB TLB invalidation routines Jonathan Cavitt
2023-10-05 8:54 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2023-10-05 15:08 ` Cavitt, Jonathan
2023-10-04 18:36 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 3/4] drm/i915: No TLB invalidation on wedged or suspended GT Jonathan Cavitt
2023-10-04 18:36 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 4/4] drm/i915/gt: Increase sleep in gt_tlb selftest sanitycheck Jonathan Cavitt
2023-10-04 19:03 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 1/4] drm/i915: Add GuC TLB Invalidation pci tags Andi Shyti
2023-10-04 19:10 ` John Harrison
2023-10-04 19:24 ` Andi Shyti
2023-10-04 19:44 ` Matt Roper
2023-10-04 19:47 ` Andi Shyti [this message]
2023-10-04 19:09 ` John Harrison
2023-10-05 2:18 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for series starting with [v5,1/4] " Patchwork
2023-10-05 2:18 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-10-05 2:37 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZR3BNSzY3IAFXHXj@ashyti-mobl2.lan \
--to=andi.shyti@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris.p.wilson@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=janusz.krzysztofik@intel.com \
--cc=jonathan.cavitt@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--cc=nirmoy.das@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox