From: "Chauhan, Shekhar" <shekhar.chauhan@intel.com>
To: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Cc: Matt Atwood <matthew.s.atwood@intel.com>,
<intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Haridhar Kalvala <haridhar.kalvala@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] drm/xe/xe3: Define Xe3 feature flags
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 23:58:32 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2c8efac2-ce0f-4366-9fec-d5eb5dc5f669@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241008180609.GT5725@mdroper-desk1.amr.corp.intel.com>
On 10/8/2024 23:36, Matt Roper wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 11:19:55PM +0530, Chauhan, Shekhar wrote:
>> On 10/8/2024 21:45, Matt Roper wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 07:53:00AM +0530, Chauhan, Shekhar wrote:
>>>> On 10/8/2024 7:05, Matt Atwood wrote:
>>>>> From: Haridhar Kalvala <haridhar.kalvala@intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Define a common set of Xe3 feature flags and definitions that will be
>>>>> used for all platforms in this family.
>>>>>
>>>>> The feature flags are inherited unchanged from the Xe2 (XE2_FEATURES)
>>>>> platform.
>>>>>
>>>>> Following B-spec details inherited from Xe2 feature flag definition
>>>>> commit.
>>>>>
>>>>> v2: reuse graphics_xe2 defintion
>>>> The patch itself LGTM, but since we're re-using Xe3_LPM with media_xe2, I
>>>> believe we can have a v3: Reuse media_xe2 definition. Also, there's a typo
>>> That wasn't a v3 change; this patch has been using media_xe2 since its
>>> original version.
>> I meant with the v3 being sent and then there were back and forth changes,
>> might as well document them.
> Yeah, but the media definition isn't something that ever changed here,
> only the graphics definition. The changelog generally just indicates
> what's different since the previous revision of the patch that was sent
> out.
Got it.
>
>>>> in the above graphics_xe2 'definition'.
>>>> Both of these are minor things which can be addressed while applying, so,
>>>> with that,
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
>>> I think you copy-pasted my r-b here by accident?
>> Ah, nope. Your review did most of the work, mine was an overview.
>> Henceforth, I didn't mean to "take" it away. I've done something similar on
>> the other patches as well in this series, where most of the review was done
>> by you, but then I had a final look over it.
>> Let me know if this isn't allowed, i.e., having 2 reviewers for a patch.
> Generally every r-b line is an indication that the person has fully
> reviewed the patch and approves it for merging. If someone raised
> concerns on an earlier version, but then doesn't have time to re-visit
> the updated patch, it's not really appropriate to put their r-b there
> since they haven't confirmed that the fixes are correct (credit for
> their review feedback is usually given in the change log as "v2: fix foo
> (Matt)." It's fine for someone other than the first reviewer to to do
> the final review of the patch as you did here, but then only the final
> reviewer's r-b should be included unless the first reviewer also has
> time to come back and check it themselves too.
Okay. Will keep this in mind!
>
>
> Matt
>
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Shekhar Chauhan <shekhar.chauhan@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>>> Bspec: 58695
>>>>> - dma_mask_size remains 46 (not documented in bspec)
>>>>> - supports_usm=1 (Bspec 59651)
>>>>> - has_flatccs=1 (Bspec 58797)
>>>>> - has_4tile=1 (Bspec 58788)
>>>>> - has_asid=1 (Bspec 59654, 59265, 60288)
>>>>> - has_range_tlb_invalidate=1 (Bspec 71126)
>>>>> - five-level page table (Bspec 59505)
>>>>> - 1 VD + 1 VE + 1 SFC (Bspec 67103, 70819)
>>>>> - platform engine mask (Bspec 60149)
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Haridhar Kalvala <haridhar.kalvala@intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Matt Atwood <matthew.s.atwood@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c | 5 ++++-
>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
>>>>> index 7ffee06fab13..2139edba9062 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
>>>>> @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ static const struct xe_media_desc media_xelpmp = {
>>>>> };
>>>>> static const struct xe_media_desc media_xe2 = {
>>>>> - .name = "Xe2_LPM / Xe2_HPM",
>>>>> + .name = "Xe2_LPM / Xe2_HPM / Xe3_LPM",
>>>>> .hw_engine_mask =
>>>>> GENMASK(XE_HW_ENGINE_VCS7, XE_HW_ENGINE_VCS0) |
>>>>> GENMASK(XE_HW_ENGINE_VECS3, XE_HW_ENGINE_VECS0) |
>>>>> @@ -360,6 +360,8 @@ static const struct gmdid_map graphics_ip_map[] = {
>>>>> { 1274, &graphics_xelpg }, /* Xe_LPG+ */
>>>>> { 2001, &graphics_xe2 },
>>>>> { 2004, &graphics_xe2 },
>>>>> + { 3000, &graphics_xe2 },
>>>>> + { 3001, &graphics_xe2 },
>>>>> };
>>>>> /* Map of GMD_ID values to media IP */
>>>>> @@ -367,6 +369,7 @@ static const struct gmdid_map media_ip_map[] = {
>>>>> { 1300, &media_xelpmp },
>>>>> { 1301, &media_xe2 },
>>>>> { 2000, &media_xe2 },
>>>>> + { 3000, &media_xe2 },
>>>>> };
>>>>> #define INTEL_VGA_DEVICE(id, info) { \
>>>> --
>>>> -shekhar
>>>>
>> --
>> -shekhar
>>
--
-shekhar
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-08 18:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-08 1:35 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Add Xe3 and Panther Lake support Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 1/6] drm/xe/xe3: Xe3 uses the same PAT settings as Xe2 Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 2/6] drm/xe/xe3: Define Xe3 feature flags Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 2:23 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 16:15 ` Matt Roper
2024-10-08 17:49 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 18:06 ` Matt Roper
2024-10-08 18:28 ` Chauhan, Shekhar [this message]
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 3/6] drm/xe/xe3: Add initial set of workarounds Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 13:46 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 16:17 ` Matt Roper
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 4/6] drm/xe/ptl: PTL re-uses Xe2 MOCS table Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 13:19 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 5/6] drm/xe/ptl: Add PTL platform definition Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 13:25 ` Chauhan, Shekhar
2024-10-08 1:35 ` [PATCH 6/6] drm/xe/xe3lpm: Add new "instance0" steering table Matt Atwood
2024-10-08 1:40 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Add Xe3 and Panther Lake support (rev3) Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:40 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:41 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:53 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:56 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 1:58 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 2:23 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 10:01 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork
2024-10-08 16:26 ` Matt Roper
2024-10-08 16:08 ` [PATCH 0/6 v3] Add Xe3 and Panther Lake support Matt Roper
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-10-04 22:05 [PATCH 0/6] " Matt Atwood
2024-10-04 22:05 ` [PATCH 2/6] drm/xe/xe3: Define Xe3 feature flags Matt Atwood
2024-10-04 22:40 ` Matt Roper
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=2c8efac2-ce0f-4366-9fec-d5eb5dc5f669@intel.com \
--to=shekhar.chauhan@intel.com \
--cc=haridhar.kalvala@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.s.atwood@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