Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/bdw: MU_FLUSH_DW a qword instead of dword

2014-03-05 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 02:38:50PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > It wasn't completely fortuitous, I did check. I was lucky you think my > check was satisfactory though. I agree it makes future code somewhat > risky so maybe some improvement is needed to safeguard. I also have/had > a patch to length

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/bdw: MU_FLUSH_DW a qword instead of dword

2014-03-05 Thread Ben Widawsky
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 10:30:21PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:05:15AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 07:33:11PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:24:34AM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 09:38:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/bdw: MU_FLUSH_DW a qword instead of dword

2014-03-05 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:05:15AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 07:33:11PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:24:34AM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 09:38:56AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > > > The actual post sync op is "Wr

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/bdw: MU_FLUSH_DW a qword instead of dword

2014-03-05 Thread Ben Widawsky
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 07:33:11PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:24:34AM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 09:38:56AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > > The actual post sync op is "Write Immediate Data QWord." It is therefore > > > arguable that we shou

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/bdw: MU_FLUSH_DW a qword instead of dword

2014-03-05 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:24:34AM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 09:38:56AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > The actual post sync op is "Write Immediate Data QWord." It is therefore > > arguable that we should have always done a qword write. > > Not really since the spec expli

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/bdw: MU_FLUSH_DW a qword instead of dword

2014-03-05 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 09:38:56AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > The actual post sync op is "Write Immediate Data QWord." It is therefore > arguable that we should have always done a qword write. Not really since the spec explicitly says that we can choose either a dword or qword write. Note that q

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/bdw: MU_FLUSH_DW a qword instead of dword

2014-03-04 Thread Ben Widawsky
The actual post sync op is "Write Immediate Data QWord." It is therefore arguable that we should have always done a qword write. The actual impetus for this patch is our decoder complains when we write a dword and I was trying to eliminate the spurious errors. With this patch, I've noticed a reall