Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 0/8] Enable HuC authentication in Icelake

2018-05-02 Thread Oscar Mateo Lozano
Obviously the subject is wrong: it should say 0/5 instead of 0/8 (I copied the subject from the cover letter meant from internal, without realizing the number of patches was different). On 5/2/2018 12:03 PM, Oscar Mateo wrote: Bare minimum number of patches to get the GuC to authenticate the

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 0/8] Enable HuC authentication in Icelake

2018-05-02 Thread Oscar Mateo
Bare minimum number of patches to get the GuC to authenticate the HuC correctly (i915.enable_guc=2). Oscar Mateo (5): drm/i915/icl/guc: Do not allow GuC submission on Icelake for now drm/i915/icl/guc: Pass the bare minimum GuC init parameters for Icelake drm/i915/icl/guc: Define the GuC