On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 03:43:05PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:41 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > Hm, that comment confuses me a bit. I've always thought that igfx_off only
> > instantiates a identity mapping and leaves the dmar unit on. Is that
> > wrong?
>
> It's co
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 04:31:54PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> - Wait 2 minutes for the stuck-in-atomic detection logic to kick in and
> grab the backtrace over netconsole. Notice that the kernel is stuck
> trying to flush the dmar tlb cache (that's how I managed to track it
> down to a dma
On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:41 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Hm, that comment confuses me a bit. I've always thought that igfx_off only
> instantiates a identity mapping and leaves the dmar unit on. Is that
> wrong?
It's completely off. If a DMAR unit has *only* graphics devices behind
it (as the on
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 03:03:43PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 15:39 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > At least for the dmar+gfx+semaphores hang I can reproduce, just disabling
> > dmar with intel_iommu=igfx_off is not good enough and iirc the same holds
> > for the dmar+rc6
On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:31 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> Things I've tried that don't work around the issue:
> - Disable dmar for the igfx with intel_iommu=igfx_off
> - Apply the ilk workaround (i.e. synchronous dmar tlb flushes + gpu
> idling while flushing).
Well, the ILK workaround was only
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 03:03:43PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 15:39 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > At least for the dmar+gfx+semaphores hang I can reproduce, just disabling
> > dmar with intel_iommu=igfx_off is not good enough and iirc the same holds
> > for the dmar+rc6
On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 15:39 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> At least for the dmar+gfx+semaphores hang I can reproduce, just disabling
> dmar with intel_iommu=igfx_off is not good enough and iirc the same holds
> for the dmar+rc6 hangs reported.
Um... let me restate that for clarity (and partly for
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 02:01:54PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 11:26 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 07:31:34PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> > > On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:15:31 +, Matthew Garrett
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > So the user has to ch
On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 11:26 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 07:31:34PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:15:31 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > > So the user has to choose between 5W of power saving or having dmar? And
> > > we default to giving th
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 07:31:34PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:15:31 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > So the user has to choose between 5W of power saving or having dmar? And
> > we default to giving them dmar? I think that's going to come as a
> > surprise to people
On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:15:31 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> So the user has to choose between 5W of power saving or having dmar? And
> we default to giving them dmar? I think that's going to come as a
> surprise to people.
You'd have to go into the BIOS to turn this on for most machines at
le
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 06:46:21PM -0200, Eugeni Dodonov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 18:15, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:41:29PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> >
> > > + /*
> > > + * Only enable RC6 if all dma remapping is disabled, or if
> > > + * the
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 18:15, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:41:29PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
>
> > + /*
> > + * Only enable RC6 if all dma remapping is disabled, or if
> > + * there's no iommu present in the machine.
> > + */
> > + if (INTEL_INFO(d
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:41:29PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> + /*
> + * Only enable RC6 if all dma remapping is disabled, or if
> + * there's no iommu present in the machine.
> + */
> + if (INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen == 6)
> + return no_iommu || dmar_disabled;
So
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 16:32, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 07:25:09 -0200, Eugeni Dodonov wrote:
>
>> Just one question I caught on 2nd read. Shouldn't we have #else within
>> this #ifdef block, to return 1? Otherwise, if CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU is
>> not defined, we'll always disable r
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 07:25:09 -0200, Eugeni Dodonov wrote:
> Just one question I caught on 2nd read. Shouldn't we have #else within
> this #ifdef block, to return 1? Otherwise, if CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU is
> not defined, we'll always disable rc6.
Oops! Thanks for catching this. Here's a new version o
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 04:41, Keith Packard wrote:
>
> +static bool intel_enable_rc6(struct drm_device *dev)
> +{
> + if (i915_enable_rc6 >= 0)
> + return i915_enable_rc6;
> + if (INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 7)
> + return 1;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU
> +
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 04:41, Keith Packard wrote:
> RC6 should always work on IVB, and should work on SNB whenever IO
> remapping is disabled. Make the default value for the parameter turn
> it on in these cases. Setting the value to either 0 or 1 will force
> the specified behavior.
>
> Signed
18 matches
Mail list logo
