On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 00:15:24 +0200, Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 12:39:44PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Use the assignment of ring->obj as a marker that the ring is active, and > > so be careful not to initialise that value too early in case we need to > > perform some workarounds that would ordinarily require touching the ring > > whilst prepping the object. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > > I guess we don't need this with the actual workaround that needs this > patch (i.e. that try-to-make-i845 patch)? Or is other stuff in the works?
It's relevant for the quirk where we might need to idle the gpu whilst manipulating the GATT, but I'm still chasing the magic to make it work for 845g. I also thought it relevant in the light of your other ringbuffer cleanups. There's probably a few other places where we could make the code more architecture agnostic and just operate on what has been setup. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
