Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/5] drm/i915: implement SNB workaround for lazy global gtt

2012-03-20 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:10:08PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:50:23 +0100, Daniel Vetter > wrote: > > + /* Sandybridge PPGTT errata: We need a global gtt mapping for MI and > > +* pipe_control writes because the gpu doesn't properly redirect them > > +* through

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/5] drm/i915: implement SNB workaround for lazy global gtt

2012-02-15 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:10:08PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:50:23 +0100, Daniel Vetter > wrote: > > + /* Sandybridge PPGTT errata: We need a global gtt mapping for MI and > > +* pipe_control writes because the gpu doesn't properly redirect them > > +* through

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/5] drm/i915: implement SNB workaround for lazy global gtt

2012-02-15 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:50:23 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > + /* Sandybridge PPGTT errata: We need a global gtt mapping for MI and > + * pipe_control writes because the gpu doesn't properly redirect them > + * through the ppgtt for non_secure batchbuffers. */ > + if (unlikely(IS_

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/5] drm/i915: implement SNB workaround for lazy global gtt

2012-02-15 Thread Daniel Vetter
PIPE_CONTROL on snb needs global gtt mappings in place to workaround a hw gotcha. No other commands need such a workaround. Luckily we can detect a PIPE_CONTROL commands easily because they have a write_domain = I915_GEM_DOMAIN_INSTRUCTION (and nothing else has that). v2: Binding the target of suc