On 9/12/2022 00:12, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
Quoting Joonas Lahtinen (2022-08-26 09:23:08)
Quoting John Harrison (2022-08-25 19:31:39)
On 8/25/2022 00:15, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
Quoting John Harrison (2022-08-24 21:45:09)
We also don't want to tie the GuC logging buffer size to the DRM
Quoting Joonas Lahtinen (2022-08-26 09:23:08)
> Quoting John Harrison (2022-08-25 19:31:39)
> > On 8/25/2022 00:15, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > > Quoting John Harrison (2022-08-24 21:45:09)
> > >> We also don't want to tie the GuC logging buffer size to the DRM
> > >> debugging output. Enabling
Quoting John Harrison (2022-08-25 19:31:39)
> On 8/25/2022 00:15, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > Quoting John Harrison (2022-08-24 21:45:09)
> >> On 8/24/2022 02:01, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> >>> NACK on this one. Let's get this reverted or fixed to eliminate
> >>> new module parameters.
> >>>
> >>>
On 8/25/2022 00:15, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
Quoting John Harrison (2022-08-24 21:45:09)
On 8/24/2022 02:01, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
NACK on this one. Let's get this reverted or fixed to eliminate
new module parameters.
What prevents us just from using the maximum sizes? Or alternatively
we
Quoting John Harrison (2022-08-24 21:45:09)
> On 8/24/2022 02:01, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > NACK on this one. Let's get this reverted or fixed to eliminate
> > new module parameters.
> >
> > What prevents us just from using the maximum sizes? Or alternatively
> > we could check the already
NACK on this one. Let's get this reverted or fixed to eliminate
new module parameters.
What prevents us just from using the maximum sizes? Or alternatively
we could check the already existing drm.debug variable or anything else
but addding 3 new module parameters.
For future reference, please do
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Alan Previn
On Wed, 2022-07-27 at 19:20 -0700, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison
>
> The GuC log buffer sizes had to be configured statically at compile
> time. This can be quite troublesome when needing to get larger logs
> out of a
