On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Right, I just didn't feel very confident making strong claims here based
> on more or less anecdotal evidence. (And even the original "never read
> FORCEWAKE" feels like folklore...) Making rc6 more stable on one machine
> was implied, but I c
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:24:09 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> We stopped reading FORCEWAKE for posting reads in
>>
>> commit 8dee3eea3ccd3b6c00a8d3a08dd715d6adf737dd
>> Author: Ben Widawsky
>> Date: Sat Sep 1 22:59:50 2012 -0700
>>
>> drm/i915: Neve
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:24:09 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> We stopped reading FORCEWAKE for posting reads in
>
> commit 8dee3eea3ccd3b6c00a8d3a08dd715d6adf737dd
> Author: Ben Widawsky
> Date: Sat Sep 1 22:59:50 2012 -0700
>
> drm/i915: Never read FORCEWAKE
>
> and started using something f
We stopped reading FORCEWAKE for posting reads in
commit 8dee3eea3ccd3b6c00a8d3a08dd715d6adf737dd
Author: Ben Widawsky
Date: Sat Sep 1 22:59:50 2012 -0700
drm/i915: Never read FORCEWAKE
and started using something from the same cacheline instead. It turns out
reading ECOBUS as posting rea
