On 09/26/2011 12:16 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:59:23 -0700, Kenneth Graunke <[email protected]> > wrote: >> From: Jesse Barnes <[email protected]> > > From the school of "If ain't broke, don't fix it" there needs to be a real > explanation of why this change is required here. > > PIPE_CONTROL and its workarounds is a very bitter pill to swallow if > MI_FLUSH continues to function. > -Chris
I hear you. The issue is that (from Eric's reading of the simulator) MI_FLUSH seems to be equivalent to PIPE_CONTROL with some unknown set of bits enabled...which means we likely do need workarounds. It's just not clear which ones. Also, according to the BSpec, MI_FLUSH is no longer validated or guaranteed to work on Ivybridge. I heard they said that about Sandybridge as well but later recanted...I don't know if they will this time, though. I suspect that it actually is broke, and we do need to fix it. This seems like a first step. --Kenneth _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
