Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/uapi: Add comment clarifying purpose of I915_TILING_* values

2021-10-13 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Tue, 2021-10-12 at 15:12 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > The I915_TILING_* values in our uapi header are intended solely for > use > with the old get_tiling/set_tiling ioctls that operate on hardware > de-tiling fences; all other uapi c

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: Add struct to hold IP version

2021-10-20 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Tue, 2021-10-19 at 17:23 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote: > Adding a structure to standardize access to IP versioning as future > platforms will have this information populated at runtime. > > The constant platform display version is not using this new struct > but > the runtime variant will

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Rename GT_STEP to GRAPHICS_STEP

2021-10-20 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Tue, 2021-10-19 at 17:23 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote: > As now graphics and media can have different steppings this patch is > renaming all _GT_STEP macros to _GRAPHICS_STEP. > > Future platforms will properly choose between

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/display: Rename POWER_DOMAIN_DPLL_DC_OFF to POWER_DOMAIN_DC_OFF

2021-10-20 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Tue, 2021-10-19 at 17:35 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote: > This power domain to disable DC states will be used in places outside > of DPLL, so making the name more generic. > > Cc: Radhakrishna Sripada > Cc: Imre Deak

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/display: Add warn_on in intel_psr_pause()

2021-10-20 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Tue, 2021-10-19 at 17:35 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote: > Right now the only user of psr_pause/resume is intel_cdclk but > additional users will be added in the future and we may need > do reference counting for PSR pause and resume, for now only adding a do -> to do? > warn_on so this cas

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: Add struct to hold IP version

2021-10-22 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Wed, 2021-10-20 at 19:19 +, Souza, Jose wrote: > On Wed, 2021-10-20 at 15:00 +0000, Yokoyama, Caz wrote: > > On Tue, 2021-10-19 at 17:23 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote: > > > Adding a structure to standardize access to IP versioning as > > > future >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: Add struct to hold IP version

2021-11-01 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Thu, 2021-10-28 at 21:08 +, Souza, Jose wrote: > Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/adlp: Keep hardware default dbox B credits

2021-09-15 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
From: Caz Yokoyama Do not overwrite registers that don't need to change from default value to 0. bspec 49213 Cc: Radhakrishna Sripada Cc: José Roberto de Souza Cc: Matt Roper Signed-off-by: Caz Yokoyama --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 13 + 1 file changed, 9 i

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Make wa list per-gt

2021-09-20 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Fri, 2021-09-17 at 10:08 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > From: Venkata Sandeep Dhanalakota > > Support for multiple GT's within a single i915 device will be > arriving > soon. Since each GT may have its own fusing and require different > workarounds, we need to make the GT workaround functions and

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 01/30] drm/i915/xehpsdv: Correct parameters for IS_XEHPSDV_GT_STEP()

2021-07-27 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Fri, 2021-07-23 at 10:42 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > During a rebase the parameters were partially renamed, but not > completely. Since the subsequent patches that start using this macro > haven't landed on an upstream tree yet this didn't cause a build > failure. > > Fixes: 086df54e20be ("drm/

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 01/30] drm/i915/xehpsdv: Correct parameters for IS_XEHPSDV_GT_STEP()

2021-07-27 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Tue, 2021-07-27 at 11:38 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 11:34:28AM -0700, Yokoyama, Caz wrote: > > On Fri, 2021-07-23 at 10:42 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > > > During a rebase the parameters were partially renamed, but not > > > completely. Since

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 06/30] drm/i915/xehp: handle new steering options

2021-07-27 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Fri, 2021-07-23 at 10:42 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > From: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio > > Xe_HP is more modular then its predecessors and as a consequence it then -> than > has > more types of replicated registers. As with l3bank regions on > previous > platforms, we may need to explicitly re-st

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] drm/i915: correct name of GT forcewake domain in error messages

2021-07-29 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Wed, 2021-07-28 at 22:41 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > For historical reasons, the GT forcewake domain used to be referred > to > as the "blitter" domain; that name is no longer accurate since the GT > domain contains a lot of additional regis

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/6] drm/i915: Re-use gen11 forcewake read functions on gen12

2021-07-29 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Wed, 2021-07-28 at 22:41 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > The forcewake read logic is identical between gen11 and gen12, only > the > forcewake table data (which is tracked separately) differs; there's > no > need to generate a separate set of

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 3/6] drm/i915: Make shadow tables range-based

2021-07-29 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Thu, 2021-07-29 at 08:21 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > Rather than defining our shadow tables as a list of individual > registers, provide them as a list of register ranges; we'll have some > ranges of multiple registers being added soon (and we already have a > couple adjacent registers that we ca

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] drm/i915/xehp: Xe_HP shadowed registers are a strict superset of gen12

2021-07-29 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: az Yokoyama -caz On Wed, 2021-07-28 at 22:41 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > The list of shadowed registers on XeHP is identical to the set for > earlier gen12 platforms, with additional ranges added for the new VCS > and VECS engines. Since those register ranges were re

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 3/6] drm/i915: Make shadow tables range-based

2021-08-10 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Thu, 2021-07-29 at 14:59 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 02:55:17PM -0700, Yokoyama, Caz wrote: > > On Thu, 2021-07-29 at 08:21 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > > > Rather than defining our shadow tables as a list of individu

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/6] drm/i915/gen11: Update shadowed register table

2021-08-10 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Wed, 2021-07-28 at 22:41 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > The bspec lists many shadowed registers (i.e., registers for which we > don't need to grab forcewake when writing) that we weren't tracking > in > the driver. Although we may not act

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/6] drm/i915/gen12: Update shadowed register table

2021-08-10 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Wed, 2021-07-28 at 22:41 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > The bspec lists many shadowed registers (i.e., registers for which we > don't need to grab forcewake when writing) that we weren't tracking > in > the driver. Although we may not act

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 7/9] drm/i915/dg2: Add new LRI reg offsets

2021-08-24 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Thu, 2021-08-05 at 09:36 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > From: Akeem G Abodunrin > > New LRI register offsets were introduced for DG2, this patch adds > those extra registers, and create new register table for setting > offsets > to compare

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: rename debugfs_gt_pm files

2021-09-10 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Fri, 2021-09-10 at 10:52 -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 05:49:40PM -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > > We shouldn't be using debugfs_ namespace for this functionality. > > Rename > > debugfs_gt_pm.[ch] to intel_gt_pm_debugfs.[ch] and then make > > functions, defines and st

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: rename debugfs_gt_pm files

2021-09-10 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Fri, 2021-09-10 at 14:52 -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:14:37PM +0000, Yokoyama, Caz wrote: > > On Fri, 2021-09-10 at 10:52 -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 05:49:40PM -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 24/50] drm/i915/dg2: DG2 uses the same sseu limits as XeHP SDV

2021-07-16 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Tue, 2021-07-13 at 20:15 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > DG2 supports compute DSS and has the same maximum number of DSS and > EU > as XeHP SDV. > > Signed-off-by: Matt Roper > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_sseu.c | 2 +- > 1 file ch

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 17/50] drm/i915/xehpsdv: Add maximum sseu limits

2021-07-18 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Tue, 2021-07-13 at 20:15 -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > Due to the removal of legacy slices and the transition to a > gslice/cslice/mslice/etc. design, we'll internally store all DSS > under > "slice0." > > Signed-off-by: Matt Rop

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 1/1] i915_pm_rpm: remove gem-execbuf-stress-extra-wait because same as gem-execbuf-stress

2019-03-19 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Please disregard. Wrong address. Sorry. -caz -Original Message- From: Intel-gfx [mailto:intel-gfx-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Caz Yokoyama Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 09:25 To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 1/1] i915_pm_rpm: remove gem-e

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v1 1/1] drm/i915/sleftests: live_execlists subtest faster

2019-03-21 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
: I0d3732a202fef90d192fb84baf8275eeadb59c02 Signed-off-by: Yokoyama, Caz --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_lrc.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_lrc.c index d61520ea03c1..16befd2a74c6 100644

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dmc: Eliminate remnant GEN references

2021-12-17 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
On Thu, 2021-12-16 at 19:41 -0800, Madhumitha Tolakanahalli Pradeep wrote: > Replace GEN with DISPLAY_VER, in line with the naming > convention > followed in the i915 driver code. > > Signed-off-by: Madhumitha Tolakanahalli Pradeep < > madhumitha.tolakanahalli.prad...@intel.com> > --- > drivers/g

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dmc: Eliminate remnant GEN references

2022-01-04 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Thu, 2021-12-23 at 03:18 +, Tolakanahalli Pradeep, Madhumitha wrote: > On Fri, 2021-12-17 at 21:37 +0000, Yokoyama, Caz wrote: > > On Thu, 2021-12-16 at 19:41 -0800, Madhumitha Tolakanahalli Pradeep > > wrote: > > > Replace GEN with D

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix Memory BW formulae for ADL-P

2021-11-08 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Fri, 2021-11-05 at 17:37 -0700, Radhakrishna Sripada wrote: > The earlier update to BW formulae broke ADL-P. Include > GEN13 to use TGL path for BW parameters. > > Fixes: c64a9a7c05be drm/i915: Update memory bandwidth formulae > Cc: Matt Roper

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH topic/for-CI] drm/i915: Add DG2 PCI IDs

2022-02-16 Thread Yokoyama, Caz
Reviewed-by: Caz Yokoyama -caz On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 13:45 -0800, Matt Roper wrote: > DG2 hardware will start showing up in CI shortly; let's make sure > it's > recognized by the driver. > > Bspec: 44477 > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi > Cc: Jani Nikula > Cc: Joo