[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/execlists: Avoid false matching of preemption when not enabled (rev2)

2018-01-27 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915/execlists: Avoid false matching of preemption when not enabled (rev2) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/37232/ State : failure == Summary == Series 37232v2 drm/i915/execlists: Avoid false matching of preemption when not enabled https://patch

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Only allocate preempt context when required

2018-01-27 Thread Chris Wilson
If we remove some hardcoded assumptions about the preempt context having a fixed id, reserved from use by normal user contexts, we may only allocate the i915_gem_context when required. Then the subsequent decisions on using preemption reduce to having the preempt context available. Signed-off-by:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Avoid false matching of preemption when not enabled

2018-01-27 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-01-27 18:12:00) > If we haven't enabled preemption for execlists, the PREEMPT_ID may be > assigned to an ordinary user context, for which we should not falsely > declare preemption complete! Actually we are always allocating the preempt context. I had thought I had follo

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/execlists: Avoid false matching of preemption when not enabled

2018-01-27 Thread Patchwork
== Series Details == Series: drm/i915/execlists: Avoid false matching of preemption when not enabled URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/37232/ State : failure == Summary == Series 37232v1 drm/i915/execlists: Avoid false matching of preemption when not enabled https://patchwork.fre

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Avoid false matching of preemption when not enabled

2018-01-27 Thread Chris Wilson
If we haven't enabled preemption for execlists, the PREEMPT_ID may be assigned to an ordinary user context, for which we should not falsely declare preemption complete! If we record the id assigned to the preempt context (or an invalid one if preemption is disabled), then we can forgo hardcoding a

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix DSI panels with v1 MIPI sequences without a DEASSERT sequence v2

2018-01-27 Thread Hans de Goede
Hi, On 26-01-18 17:38, Ville Syrjälä wrote: On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 08:52:07AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: So far models of the Dell Venue 8 Pro, with a panel with MIPI panel index = 3, one of which has been kindly provided to me by Jan Brummer, where not working with the i915 driver, giving a

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/9] drm/i915/psr: Inline psr2 caps checks.

2018-01-27 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > Add a macro to check for a bit offset in a DPCD reg, use this macro to > eliminate three functions and a local. IMO less readable with this change. BR, Jani. > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi > Signed-off-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: only assign dev_priv->pch_id on successful pch detection

2018-01-27 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting David Weinehall (2018-01-26 15:53:53) >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 04:48:05PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >> > Currently pch_id gets assigned also when there's no pch. It doesn't look >> > like it makes a difference, but do the right thing anyway. >>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/10] drm/i915/cnl: Add Cannonlake PCI IDs for another SKU.

2018-01-27 Thread Jani Nikula
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:12:00AM +, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >> > The only difference is that this SKUs has the full >> > Port A/E split named as Port F. >> > >> > But since SKUs differences don't matter on the