Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: Remove early exit on i915_gpu_idle

2011-10-15 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 13:47:15 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > [Description from: Daniel Vetter] > I've just discussed this quickly with Chris on irc and it's probably > best to just kill the list_empty early bailout. gpu_idle isn't a > fastpath, so who cares. One candidate where we emit commands to th

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: ILK + VT-d workaround

2011-10-15 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 13:47:16 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > Idle the GPU before doing any unmaps. We know if VT-d is in use through > an exported variable from iommu code. > > This should avoid a known HW issue. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky Just one minor comment below, but Reviewed-by: Chris

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: ILK + VT-d workaround

2011-10-15 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 01:47:16PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > Idle the GPU before doing any unmaps. We know if VT-d is in use through > an exported variable from iommu code. > > This should avoid a known HW issue. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky > --- > drivers/char/agp/intel-gtt.c|

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: Remove early exit on i915_gpu_idle

2011-10-15 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 01:47:15PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > [Description from: Daniel Vetter] > I've just discussed this quickly with Chris on irc and it's probably > best to just kill the list_empty early bailout. gpu_idle isn't a > fastpath, so who cares. One candidate where we emit commands

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: ILK + VT-d workaround

2011-10-15 Thread Ben Widawsky
Idle the GPU before doing any unmaps. We know if VT-d is in use through an exported variable from iommu code. This should avoid a known HW issue. Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky --- drivers/char/agp/intel-gtt.c| 28 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h |2 +

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: Remove early exit on i915_gpu_idle

2011-10-15 Thread Ben Widawsky
[Description from: Daniel Vetter] I've just discussed this quickly with Chris on irc and it's probably best to just kill the list_empty early bailout. gpu_idle isn't a fastpath, so who cares. One candidate where we emit commands to the ring without adding anything onto these lists is e.g. pageflip.

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/4] intel-iommu: Export a flag indicating that the IOMMU is used for iGFX.

2011-10-15 Thread Ben Widawsky
From: David Woodhouse We really don't want this to work in the general case; device drivers *shouldn't* care whether they are behind an IOMMU or not. But the integrated graphics is a special case, because the IOMMU and the GTT are all kind of smashed into one and generally horrifically buggy, so

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 0/4] ILK VT-d fix

2011-10-15 Thread Ben Widawsky
Tested-by: Ben Widawsky I ran the airlied test on it for 4 minutes. It normally hangs in <1 minute. Changes from the last version: Rebased on the new patches from David Woodhouse Use the new global to determine if we need workaround. Idling can fail now, instead of being uninterruptible. No more

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/4] intel-iommu: Workaround IOTLB hang on Ironlake GPU

2011-10-15 Thread Ben Widawsky
From: David Woodhouse To work around a hardware issue, we have to submit IOTLB flushes while the graphics engine is idle. The graphics driver will (we hope) go to great lengths to ensure that it gets that right on the affected chipset(s)... so let's not screw it over by deferring the unmap and do

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Rename PIPE_CONTROL bit defines to be less terse.

2011-10-15 Thread Ben Widawsky
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 16:01:17 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 04:51:16PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > I thought we all agreed that "PIPE_CONTROL_WRITE_FLUSH" doesn't make > > sense for Gen6? Or was that just me agreeing with myself? > > I couldn't find any comment of yours

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Rename PIPE_CONTROL bit defines to be less terse.

2011-10-15 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 04:51:16PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > I thought we all agreed that "PIPE_CONTROL_WRITE_FLUSH" doesn't make > sense for Gen6? Or was that just me agreeing with myself? I couldn't find any comment of yours to that effect ... :p You'd be much happier if I add a RENDER_CACHE_

Re: [Intel-gfx] i915 module does not find 82865G if configured as secondary

2011-10-15 Thread Tempura San
Sorry for the late reply. I have now tested with the current kernel (3.0.6). At least it does not mess up as much as the manual patches, but still it does not work. I have attached the dmesg output if you want to check. If you would like me to test patches, please do not hesitate. As I am a bit s