Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-04-04 Thread Chris Wilson
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:27:12PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 11:01:02AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:28:09PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > > > Currently all scanout buffers must be uncached because the > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-04-04 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 11:01:02AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:28:09PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > Currently all scanout buffers must be uncached because the > > display controller doesn't snoop the LLC. SNB introduced another > > method

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-04-04 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:28:09PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > From: Ville Syrjälä > > Currently all scanout buffers must be uncached because the > display controller doesn't snoop the LLC. SNB introduced another > method to guarantee coherency for the display controller. It's > called the GFDT

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-03-06 Thread Chris Wilson
From: Ville Syrjälä Currently all scanout buffers must be uncached because the display controller doesn't snoop the LLC. SNB introduced another method to guarantee coherency for the display controller. It's called the GFDT or graphics data type. Pages that have the GFDT bit enabled in their PTEs

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-03-04 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 05:28:52PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 08:32:57PM +0200, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote: > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > Currently all scanout buffers must be uncached because the > > display controller doesn't snoop the LLC. SNB introduced a

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-03-04 Thread Chris Wilson
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 03:51:11PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 05:39:09PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 05:28:52PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > The other thing was that I didn't manage to get things to work properly, > > > leaving some random

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-03-04 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 05:39:09PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 05:28:52PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > The other thing was that I didn't manage to get things to work properly, > > leaving some random cachline dirt on the screen. Looking at your code, you > > add the gfdt

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-03-03 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 05:28:52PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > The other thing was that I didn't manage to get things to work properly, > leaving some random cachline dirt on the screen. Looking at your code, you > add the gfdt flush to every ring_flush, whereas I've tried to be clever > and only

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-03-03 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 08:32:57PM +0200, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote: > From: Ville Syrjälä > > Currently all scanout buffers must be uncached because the > display controller doesn't snoop the LLC. SNB introduced another > method to guarantee coherency for the display controller. It's >

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: GFDT support for SNB/IVB

2013-03-01 Thread ville . syrjala
From: Ville Syrjälä Currently all scanout buffers must be uncached because the display controller doesn't snoop the LLC. SNB introduced another method to guarantee coherency for the display controller. It's called the GFDT or graphics data type. Pages that have the GFDT bit enabled in their PTEs