Quoting Oscar Mateo (2017-10-13 21:54:04) > Since we are trying to put all WA stuff together, do not forget about the BB > WAs. > > Signed-off-by: Oscar Mateo <oscar.ma...@intel.com> > Cc: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuopp...@linux.intel.com> > --- > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.h > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.h > index 44d3941..2d7ea51 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.h > @@ -35,4 +35,7 @@ > int intel_whitelist_workarounds_init(struct intel_engine_cs *engine); > void intel_whitelist_workarounds_apply(struct intel_engine_cs *engine); > > +int intel_bb_workarounds_init(struct intel_engine_cs *engine); > +void intel_bb_workarounds_fini(struct intel_engine_cs *engine);
I looked at this and thought, intel_engine_init_bb_workarounds. Because they are engine specific and stored on the engine. I'm not fussed, and I think the motion from lrc.c worth it. Especially if it means we get a consistent means of logging all the w/a we apply and can quickly search for ones we missed. Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
