On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:59:17 +0100
Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 16:38:42 -0700, Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org>
> wrote:
> > Check for IVB desktop, mobile and other SKUs and set flags
> > appropriately.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org>
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > index 2a41118..0b5e263 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > @@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ struct intel_device_info {
> > u8 is_pineview : 1;
> > u8 is_broadwater : 1;
> > u8 is_crestline : 1;
> > + u8 is_ivybridge : 1;
>
> Since ivybridge is synonymous with GEN7, we have been going with the
> latter. I want to reserve the capability bits for instances where we
> either have a workaround for a few chipsets (and so I have a patch to
> strip out the is_broadwater and is_crestline since they are just a single
> pci-id each) or otherwise describing a feature across chipsets.
>
> So I think we just want IS_GEN7() for IVB code.
I'd rather keep them separate since we know we'll have gen7 chips with
different display engines in the future. I've been trying to use
IS_GEN for render related checks, IS_IVB for specific display checks,
and HAS_PCH for the ilk+ split (though for the most part that should go
away with proper function call backs).
But I'll take a look at them again and see what's most appropriate.
Jesse
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
