On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 02:02:09PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:46:17AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > By our earlier reckoning, move from a snooped/llc setting to an uncached > > setting, leaves the CPU cache in a consistent state irrespective of our > > domain tracking - so we can forgo the warning about the lack of > > invalidation. Similarly for any writes posted to the snooped CPU domain, > > we know will be safely clflushed to the uncached PTEs after forcing the > > domain change. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com> > > I ran into this several times while doing the PPGTT development, and was > always scared to just remove it. Does it make sense to keep the > write_domain assertion with this gone?
I think we've justified in the earlier series why we can drop the WARN_ON(write) with impunity. As we don't need to do so immediately, I'd like to sleep on it for a while. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
