On Wed, 2019-05-29 at 17:58 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Fri, 24 May 2019, Stuart Summers wrote:
> > Currently, the subslice_mask runtime parameter is stored as an
> > array of subslices per slice. Expand the subslice mask array to
> > better match what is presented to userspace through the
> >
On Wed, 2019-05-29 at 17:33 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2019, Nathan Chancellor
> wrote:
> > Hi Stuart,
> >
> > On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 08:40:22AM -0700, Stuart Summers wrote:
> > > Currently, the subslice_mask runtime parameter is stored as an
> > > array of subslices per slice.
On Fri, 24 May 2019, Stuart Summers wrote:
> Currently, the subslice_mask runtime parameter is stored as an
> array of subslices per slice. Expand the subslice mask array to
> better match what is presented to userspace through the
> I915_QUERY_TOPOLOGY_INFO ioctl. The index into this array is
>
On Wed, 29 May 2019, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Hi Stuart,
>
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 08:40:22AM -0700, Stuart Summers wrote:
>> Currently, the subslice_mask runtime parameter is stored as an
>> array of subslices per slice. Expand the subslice mask array to
>> better match what is presented to
Hi Stuart,
On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 08:40:22AM -0700, Stuart Summers wrote:
> Currently, the subslice_mask runtime parameter is stored as an
> array of subslices per slice. Expand the subslice mask array to
> better match what is presented to userspace through the
> I915_QUERY_TOPOLOGY_INFO ioctl.
Currently, the subslice_mask runtime parameter is stored as an
array of subslices per slice. Expand the subslice mask array to
better match what is presented to userspace through the
I915_QUERY_TOPOLOGY_INFO ioctl. The index into this array is
then calculated:
slice * subslice stride + subslice
