Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: Properly terminate KMS mode name string during tv init

2016-01-29 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 02:52:29PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > Caught by Coverity. > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak Reviewed-by: David Weinehall > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_tv.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_tv.

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: Add debug info for failed MSI enabling

2016-01-29 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 02:52:28PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > While not being able to enable MSI interrupts may be a normal > circumstance, for debugging it may still be a useful information, so > emit an info about this. > > Caught by Coverity. > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915/chv: Fix error path in GPU freq helpers

2016-01-29 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 02:52:27PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > Atm we wouldn't catch these errors or on the error path we would end up > with a division-by-zero, fix this up. > > Caught by Coverity. > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak Reviewed-by: David Weinehall > -

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/4] drm/i915: Sanity check DP AUX message buffer and size

2016-01-29 Thread David Weinehall
's > or the kernel's documentation of the function and can't imagine what it > would do with the NULL ptr. To better document this use of the > parameters it still make sense to add an explicit check for this to the > code. > > Caught by Coverity. > &

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: Move stolen memory initialization earlier during loading

2016-01-22 Thread David Weinehall
resources with no or little dependencies on > other device specific resources towards the beginning of the init > sequence. > > Suggested-by: Chris Wilson > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak Reviewed-by: David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/7] drm/i915: Move MCHBAR setup earlier during init

2016-01-22 Thread David Weinehall
earlier in an upcoming patch, so this is also a preparation for that. > > Factor out the init/clean-up code to separate functions to make things > clearer in the i915_driver_load()/unload() functions. > > Suggested-by: Chris Wilson > Signed-off-by:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/7] drm/i915: Move allocation of various workqueues earlier during init

2016-01-22 Thread David Weinehall
Also factor out things to separate init/cleanup functions to make > i915_driver_load()/unload() clearer, atm it's somewhat difficult to > follow there in what order resources are inited/cleaned-up. > > Suggested-by: Chris Wilson > Signed-off

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/7] drm/i915: Sanitize i915_gem_load() init and clean-up

2016-01-22 Thread David Weinehall
ned-off-by: Imre Deak Reviewed-by: David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/7] drm/i915: Sanitize GEM shrinker init and clean-up

2016-01-22 Thread David Weinehall
nker and OOM registration calls. > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak Reviewed-by: David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/7] drm/i915: Sanitize i915_get_bridge_dev() error path

2016-01-22 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 03:26:27PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > Clarify the name of the label on the error path, making it clear what's > being cleaned up. The kmem_cache_destroy() calls are NOPs on the > corresponding error path. > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak Reviewed

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/7] drm/i915: Sanitize up DMC/CSR ucode cleanup code

2016-01-22 Thread David Weinehall
during driver loading, but didn't > move the cleanup earlier correspondingly during unloading. Fix this up. > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak Reviewed-by: David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lis

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3] lib/igt_pm: Lib for power management

2016-01-14 Thread David Weinehall
save the previous settings, to allow for resetting the values after we've finished testing. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- .../intel-gpu-tools/intel-gpu-tools-docs.xml | 1 + lib/Makefile.sources | 2 + lib/igt.h

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3] Add a lib for power management helpers

2016-01-14 Thread David Weinehall
this lib would probably make sense too. v2: Change name of library to igt_pm Namespace all exported functions with igt_pm_ v3: Various fixes based on feedback from Thomas Wood David Weinehall (1): lib/igt_pm: Lib for power management .../intel-gpu-tools/intel-gpu-tools-docs.xml | 1

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: don't enable autosuspend on platforms without RPM support

2015-12-18 Thread David Weinehall
_autosuspend(device); > + } else { > + pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(device); > + } > > /* >* The core calls the driver load handler with an RPM reference held. Reviewed-by: David Weinehall Kind regards, David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] lib/igt_pm: Lib for power management

2015-12-15 Thread David Weinehall
save the previous settings, to allow for resetting the values after we've finished testing. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- lib/Makefile.sources | 2 + lib/igt.h| 1 + lib/igt_aux.c| 15 +--- lib/igt_pm.c | 233 ++

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v2] Add a lib for power management helpers

2015-12-15 Thread David Weinehall
this lib would probably make sense too. v2: Change name of library to igt_pm Namespace all exported functions with igt_pm_ David Weinehall (1): lib/igt_pm: Lib for power management lib/Makefile.sources | 2 + lib/igt.h| 1 + lib/igt_aux.c| 15 +--- lib/igt_pm.c

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] RFC: split PM workarounds into separate lib

2015-12-10 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 01:22:14PM +, Zanoni, Paulo R wrote: > Em Ter, 2015-12-08 às 10:50 +0200, David Weinehall escreveu: > > Since the defaults for some external power management related > > settings > > prevents us from testing our power management functionality pro

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] RFC: split PM workarounds into separate lib

2015-12-10 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:42:27PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 10:50:39AM +0200, David Weinehall wrote: > > Since the defaults for some external power management related settings > > prevents us from testing our power management functionality properly, >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] RFC: split PM workarounds into separate lib

2015-12-10 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:09:42AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 05:05:12PM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > > 2015-12-08 11:42 GMT-02:00 Ville Syrjälä : > > > On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 10:50:39AM +0200, David Weinehall wrote: > > >> Since the de

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] RFC: split PM workarounds into separate lib

2015-12-08 Thread David Weinehall
power management it might be better to choose a different name for the library. David Weinehall (1): lib/pm_workarounds: Lib for PM workarounds lib/Makefile.sources | 2 + lib/igt.h| 1 + lib/igt_aux.c| 15 +--- lib/pm_workarounds.c

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] lib/pm_workarounds: Lib for PM workarounds

2015-12-08 Thread David Weinehall
allow for resetting the values after we've finished testing. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- lib/Makefile.sources | 2 + lib/igt.h| 1 + lib/igt_aux.c| 15 +--- lib/pm_workarounds.c | 233 +++ lib/pm_workaroun

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-11-18 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 01:49:06PM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > 2015-11-17 13:34 GMT-02:00 Daniel Vetter : [snip] > > I thought the hidden tests in kms_frontbuffer_tracking would be useful, > > just really slow, but seems I'm mistaken. In general we have a bunch of > > stress tests which we want to

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3 v3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-11-12 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 01:52:48PM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 03:18:30PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote: > > @@ -931,16 +930,20 @@ run_basic_modes(const struct access_mode *mode, > > struct buffers buffers; > > > > f

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 0/3 v3] Unify slow/combinatorial test handling

2015-10-30 Thread David Weinehall
t_subtest_flags() / ugt_subtest_flags_f() functions and pass the subtest types as part of the flags parameter. v2: Incorporate various suggestions from reviewers. v3: Rewrite to provide a generic mechanism for categorising the subtests David Weinehall (3): Copy gem_concurrent_all to gem_concurre

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3 v3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-30 Thread David Weinehall
runs/lists all subtests instead of just the default set. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- lib/igt_core.c | 43 ++-- lib/igt_core.h | 42 tests/gem_concurrent_blit.c | 50 +- tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracki

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 3/3 v3] Remove superfluous gem_concurrent_all.c

2015-10-30 Thread David Weinehall
When gem_concurrent_blit was converted to use the new common framework for choosing whether or not to include slow/combinatorial tests, gem_concurrent_all became superfluous. This patch removes it. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- tests/.gitignore |1 - tests/Makefile.sources

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 1/3 v3] Copy gem_concurrent_all to gem_concurrent_blit

2015-10-30 Thread David Weinehall
We'll both rename gem_concurrent_all over gem_concurrent_blit and change gem_concurrent_blit in this changeset. To make this easier to follow we first do the the rename. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- tests/gem_concurrent_blit.c | 1116 ++- 1

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-30 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 02:12:15PM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > 2015-10-28 9:29 GMT-02:00 David Weinehall : > > Some tests should not be run by default, due to their slow, > > and sometimes superfluous, nature. > > > > We still want to be able to run these tests i

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-30 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 05:14:28PM +, Thomas Wood wrote: > If this is intended to be documented and used in tests, then it should > be included in the public API (i.e. without the underscore prefix). True. Will fix. > > + * > > + * This is used to skip subtests that should only be included >

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 3/3] Remove superfluous gem_concurrent_all.c

2015-10-28 Thread David Weinehall
When gem_concurrent_blit was converted to use the new common framework for choosing whether or not to include slow/combinatorial tests, gem_concurrent_all became superfluous. This patch removes it. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- tests/.gitignore |1 - tests/Makefile.sources

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-28 Thread David Weinehall
it in gem_concurrent_blit & kms_frontbuffer_tracking. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- lib/igt_core.c | 24 + lib/igt_core.h | 7 ++ tests/gem_concurrent_blit.c | 44 - tests/kms_frontbuffer_tracking.c | 208 ++-

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 0/3 v2] Unify slow/combinatorial test handling

2015-10-28 Thread David Weinehall
ll command line option to igt_core, changes gem_concurrent_blit and kms_frontbuffer_tracking to use this instead of their own methods, and removes gem_concurrent_all in the process, since it's now unnecessary. v2: Incorporate various suggestions from reviewers. David Weinehall (3): Copy gem_co

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 1/3] Copy gem_concurrent_all to gem_concurrent_blit

2015-10-28 Thread David Weinehall
We'll both rename gem_concurrent_all over gem_concurrent_blit and change gem_concurrent_blit in this changeset. To make this easier to follow we first do the the rename. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- tests/gem_concurrent_blit.c | 1116 ++- 1

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/4] lib: Skip suspend/hibernate tests if the system doesn't support them

2015-10-28 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 07:29:39PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 08:58:17AM +0200, David Weinehall wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 12:39:31PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > > On 10/22/2015 01:35 PM, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote: > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/4] lib: Skip suspend/hibernate tests if the system doesn't support them

2015-10-28 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:02:09AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > Depending on what the hardware supports, for hibernate to disk there's ipmi > > power-on. > > > > ipmi-power -h $hostname --stat will show the status of the machine, > > ipmi-power -h $hostname --on will power it on. > > > > Maybe

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/4] lib: Skip suspend/hibernate tests if the system doesn't support them

2015-10-26 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 12:39:31PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On 10/22/2015 01:35 PM, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote: > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > Do a dry run with rtcwake first to determine if the system even supports > > the intended suspend state. If not, skip the test. > > > > Fix

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-26 Thread David Weinehall
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 03:59:24PM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > 2015-10-26 15:30 GMT-02:00 David Weinehall : > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 02:44:18PM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > >> 2015-10-26 12:59 GMT-02:00 David Weinehall > >> : > >> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-26 Thread David Weinehall
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 04:28:15PM +, Thomas Wood wrote: > On 26 October 2015 at 15:28, David Weinehall > wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 03:55:23PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote: > >> On 23 October 2015 at 12:42, David Weinehall > >> wrote: > >> > So

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-26 Thread David Weinehall
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 02:44:18PM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > 2015-10-26 12:59 GMT-02:00 David Weinehall : > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:50:46AM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > >> It's not clear to me, please clarify: now the tests th

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-26 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 03:55:23PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote: > On 23 October 2015 at 12:42, David Weinehall > wrote: > > Some tests should not be run by default, due to their slow, > > and sometimes superfluous, nature. > > > > We still want to be able to run th

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 1/3] Rename gem_concurren_all over gem_concurrent_blit

2015-10-26 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 03:32:08PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote: > gem_concurrent_all is misspelled in the subject. > > On 23 October 2015 at 12:42, David Weinehall > wrote: > > We'll both rename gem_concurrent_all over gem_concurrent_blit > > and change gem_concurre

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-26 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:50:46AM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: [snip] > It's not clear to me, please clarify: now the tests that were > previously completely hidden will be listed in --list-subtests and > will be shown as skipped during normal runs? Yes. Daniel and I discussed this and he though

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 0/3] Unify slow/combinatorial test handling

2015-10-26 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 02:47:57PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 12:58:45PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 02:42:33PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > > Until now we've had no unified way to handle slow/combinatorial tests. &g

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 3/3] Remove gem_concurrent_all, since it is now superfluous

2015-10-23 Thread David Weinehall
With the addition of unified command-line handling for slow/combinatorial tests we no longer need the gem_concurrent_blit/gem_concurrent_all magic. Delete the latter, since the former has a more descriptive file name. --- tests/Makefile.sources |1 - tests/gem_concurrent_all.c | 1108 -

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 0/3] Unify slow/combinatorial test handling

2015-10-23 Thread David Weinehall
_concurrent_all to gem_concurrent_blit. David Weinehall (3): Rename gem_concurren_all over gem_concurrent_blit Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests Remove gem_concurrent_all, since it is now superfluous lib/igt_core.c | 19 + lib/igt_core.h

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] Unify handling of slow/combinatorial tests

2015-10-23 Thread David Weinehall
Some tests should not be run by default, due to their slow, and sometimes superfluous, nature. We still want to be able to run these tests though in some cases. Until now there's been no unified way of handling this. Remedy this by introducing the --with-slow-combinatorial option to igt_core, and

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 1/3] Rename gem_concurren_all over gem_concurrent_blit

2015-10-23 Thread David Weinehall
We'll both rename gem_concurrent_all over gem_concurrent_blit and change gem_concurrent_blit in this changeset. To make this easier to follow we first do the the rename. --- tests/gem_concurrent_blit.c | 1116 ++- 1 file changed, 1108 insertions(+), 8 deleti

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2 v2 addendum v2] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-08-13 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 05:19:35PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 12 Aug 2015, David Weinehall wrote: > > Some more fixup is needed; the bits from Antti's patch > > that actually expanded the struct to fully fit the newer > > versions of the child_device_con

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2 v2 addendum] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-08-13 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 03:13:35PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 12 Aug 2015, David Weinehall wrote: > > Some more fixup is needed; the bits from Antti's patch > > that actually expanded the struct to fully fit the newer > > versions of the child_device_con

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/3] HDMI optimization series

2015-08-12 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:41:42AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 02:05:47PM +0530, Jindal, Sonika wrote: > > > > > > On 8/10/2015 1:38 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > >On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 04:50:37AM +, Jindal, Sonika wrote: > > >>Hi Daniel, > > >> > > >>That patch was

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2 v2 addendum] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-08-12 Thread David Weinehall
erged (the Iboost patch will need corresponding adjustment to remove the changes I split out): Expand common_child_dev_config to be able to fit all information defined by the latest VBT specification. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall CC: Antti Koskipaa --- intel_bios.c |7 ++- intel_bio

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 4/3] tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests

2015-08-10 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 11:30:00PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: [snip] > Update version of this patch is still missing. I'll need to revert the > kernel side if this one doesn't show up soonish. > > Also you're breaking the invalid-flags testcase (did you bother to run > them all and check for regr

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 4/3] tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests

2015-08-10 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:33:31PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On 08/06/2015 02:30 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 09:52:52AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 05:53:17PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > >>> On Wed, Ma

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] Revert "tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: fix invalid params"

2015-08-10 Thread David Weinehall
re if the testcase don't show up within a few days. > > > > Cc: David Weinehall > > Cc: Jesse Barnes > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter > > --- > > tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > dif

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] Revert "tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: fix invalid params"

2015-08-07 Thread David Weinehall
as probably because of Chris's strong opposition to the feature in the first place; I've had the testcase laying around on my computer for quite a while. Anyhow, here's a slightly modified version of that test -- hopefully not breaking anything. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall diff

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2 v2] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-08-06 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:18:35PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 06:32:01PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 10:59:00AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 04:55:52PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Per-DDI I_boost override

2015-08-06 Thread David Weinehall
d remove unused iboost_bit variable > > Issue: VIZ-5676 > Signed-off-by: Antti Koskipaa Now that patch 1/2 has been updated, I'm ready to give this: Reviewed-by: David Weinehall Kind regards, David ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-g

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2 v2] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-08-06 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:59:10PM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote: > On 8/5/2015 9:59 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 04:55:52PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > >>VBT version 196 increased the size of common_child_dev_config. The parser > >>code as

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2 v2] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-08-05 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 10:59:00AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 04:55:52PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > VBT version 196 increased the size of common_child_dev_config. The parser > > code assumed that the size of this structure would not change. > &

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2 v2] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-08-04 Thread David Weinehall
ather than hardcoding things like this, but for now the variants are fairly managable. v2: Stricter size checks Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c | 26 ++ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gp

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-07-14 Thread David Weinehall
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 11:24:46AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:10:54PM +0300, Antti Koskipaa wrote: > > VBT version 196 increased the size of common_child_dev_config. The parser > > code assumed that the size of this structure would not change. > > > > So now, instead

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Allow parsing of variable size child device entries from VBT

2015-07-10 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:10:54PM +0300, Antti Koskipaa wrote: > VBT version 196 increased the size of common_child_dev_config. The parser > code assumed that the size of this structure would not change. > > So now, instead of checking for smaller size, check that the VBT entry is > not too large

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] tests/kms_color:Color IGT

2015-07-10 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 04:02:53PM +0530, Dhanya Pillai wrote: > From: Dhanya > > This patch will verify color correction capability of a display driver. > Gamma/CSC/De-gamma supported. > > Signed-off-by: Dhanya > --- > tests/Makefile.sources | 3 + > tests/kms_color.c | 639 >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/2] I915 GEM context updates

2015-07-08 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 05:23:51PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 2:21 PM, David Weinehall > wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 03:01:06PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 04:36:55PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > >> &

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: set FDI translations to NULL on SKL

2015-07-06 Thread David Weinehall
On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 12:31:30PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > From: Paulo Zanoni > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c: In function ‘intel_prepare_ddi’: > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c:517:6: warning: > ‘ddi_translations_fdi’ may be used uninitialized in this function > [-Wmaybe-uninitialized

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: apply the PCI_D0/D3 hibernation workaround everywhere on pre GEN6

2015-07-01 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 02:35:24PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Wed 2015-07-01 13:53:31, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > Sure it does. Eventually we'll want to avoid resuming runtime suspended > > devices when entering system suspend. For broken machines we'd need to > > resume the GPU at that point. >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-30 Thread David Weinehall
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 06:12:54PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 01:35:06PM +0300, Antti Koskipää wrote: > > Looks fine to me. > > > > Reviewed-by: Antti Koskipää > > > > > > On 06/25/2015 11:11 AM, David Weinehall wrote: > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [alsa-devel] [PATCH 3/4] snd: add support for displayport multi-stream to hda codec.

2015-06-25 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 04:22:38PM +0800, Raymond Yau wrote: > > > > > > Shall we move or cc this discussion on audio driver side to ALSA ML? > > > > Oops I thought I had cc'ed these patches to alsa-devel as well when I > sent them. > > > > > I think we also need to decide how to manage PCM devices

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Per-DDI I_boost override

2015-06-25 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 09:37:22AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 09:14:09AM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > Looks good. > > > > Reviewed-by: David Weinehall > > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 02:23:37PM +0300, Antti Koskipaa wrote: &

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-25 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:17:34AM +0530, Jindal, Sonika wrote: > > > On 6/23/2015 4:42 PM, David Weinehall wrote: > >On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 05:05:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >>On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50:33PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-25 Thread David Weinehall
This patch adds support for 0.85V VccIO on Skylake Y, separate buffer translation tables for Skylake U, and support for I_boost for the entries that needs this. Changes in v2: * Refactored the code a bit to move all DDI signal level setup to intel_ddi.c Issue: VIZ-5677 Signed-off-by: David

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-25 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:10:13AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > These are static routing, but called fairly often. (Often enough that > you care to only read the register once.) Any reason not to preserve > these routing tables in dev_priv or, slightly more preferrable, intel_dp? Looking over this

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Per-DDI I_boost override

2015-06-24 Thread David Weinehall
Looks good. Reviewed-by: David Weinehall On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 02:23:37PM +0300, Antti Koskipaa wrote: > An OEM may request increased I_boost beyond the recommended values > by specifying an I_boost value to be applied to all swing entries for > a port. These override values are spe

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-23 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 05:05:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50:33PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > @@ -3520,6 +3545,9 @@ intel_dp_set_signal_levels(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, > > uint32_t *DP) > > } else if (HAS_DDI(dev)) { > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-23 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 05:05:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50:33PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > @@ -3520,6 +3545,9 @@ intel_dp_set_signal_levels(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, > > uint32_t *DP) > > } else if (HAS_DDI(dev)) { > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-23 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:59:34AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 01:47:30PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:10:13AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50:33PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-18 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:10:13AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50:33PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > +static const struct ddi_buf_trans *skl_get_buf_trans_dp(struct drm_device > > *dev, > > struct drm_i915_private not struct drm_device! The

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

2015-06-18 Thread David Weinehall
This patch adds support for 0.85V VccIO on Skylake Y, separate buffer translation tables for Skylake U, and support for I_boost for the entries that needs this. Issue: VIZ-5677 Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 8 + drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 12

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/03] drm/i915: add a context parameter to {en, dis}able zero address mapping

2015-05-29 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 05:56:25PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 05:52:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 03:39:26PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 05:00:13PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 4/3] tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests

2015-05-28 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 01:32:10PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > A simple functional test here which does: > a) an execbuf with just 1 batch. With full ppgtt you should get that one > at offset 0. If not, skip the testcase. > b) set the NO_ZEROMAP property. > c) re-run the same batch, assert that n

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 4/3] tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests

2015-05-28 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 01:32:10PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:44:53PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests > > > > Expand the context parameter tests to cover the > > no-zeromap parameter. &g

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/03] Preventing zero GPU virtual address allocation

2015-05-27 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:50:37AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > It also have just as much risk as reporting EBUSY due to the CL client > trying to use a pinned buffer. > > However, it is a security hole because the same process can arrange to > have whatever buffer it likes at 0 then access it thr

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 4/3] tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests

2015-05-21 Thread David Weinehall
tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests Expand the context parameter tests to cover the no-zeromap parameter. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- gem_ctx_param_basic.c | 24 +++- 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tests

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/03] Preventing zero GPU virtual address allocation

2015-05-21 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:43:00AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:08:42AM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: [snip] > > Not exactly sure what you suggest here? > > That you have an unmitigated security hole in your design. No, I meant what you suggest as a

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/03] Preventing zero GPU virtual address allocation

2015-05-21 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 04:54:19PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > > > > This patch series (one patch each for libdrm, the kernel, and beignet) > > > > > aims to provide a means to add a context-specific means to prevent > > > > > a mapping to GPU vi

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/03] Preventing zero GPU virtual address allocation

2015-05-21 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:00:43PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 03:14:06PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 03:09:43PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 04:54:19PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > &g

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 03/03] beignet: set I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_NO_ZEROMAP when initializing context

2015-05-20 Thread David Weinehall
Set the I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_NO_ZEROMAP context parameter to disable zero mappings if libdrm is new enough to expose such functionality. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- CMakeLists.txt |6 ++ src/CMakeLists.txt |5 + src/intel/intel_driver.c |4 3 files

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 02/03] libdrm: export context_{get, set}param and I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_NO_ZEROMAP

2015-05-20 Thread David Weinehall
Provide helper functions for the context_{get,set}param ioctls, as well as the I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_NO_ZEROMAP parameter. Signed-off-by: David Weinehall --- configure.ac |2 - include/drm/i915_drm.h |1 intel/intel_bufmgr.h |4 +++ intel/intel_bufmgr_gem.c | 57

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/03] drm/i915: add a context parameter to {en, dis}able zero address mapping

2015-05-20 Thread David Weinehall
Export a new context parameter that can be set/queried through the context_{get,set}param ioctls. This parameter is passed as a context flag and decides whether or not a GPU address mapping is allowed to be made at address zero. The default is to allow such mappings. Signed-off-by: David

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/03] Preventing zero GPU virtual address allocation

2015-05-20 Thread David Weinehall
n and exports the context parameter. The beignet patch uses the new libdrm function to disable zero mappings if that functionality is available. David Weinehall (3): drm/i915: add a context parameter to {en,dis}able zero address mapping libdrm: export context_{get,set}para

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dp: make link rate printing prettier

2015-05-19 Thread David Weinehall
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 04:01:45PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > Turn > > [drm:intel_dp_print_rates] source rates: 162000,27,54, > [drm:intel_dp_print_rates] sink rates: 162000,27, > [drm:intel_dp_print_rates] common rates: 162000,27, > > into > > [drm:intel_dp_prin

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH RESEND 2/2] drm/i915: don't register invalid gmbus pins for skl

2015-05-11 Thread David Weinehall
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 03:33:44PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > Do no expose invalid gmbus pins as i2c devices to userspace. "Do not", perchance? Kind regards, David ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix 32b overflow check in gen8_ppgtt_alloc_page_directories

2015-05-04 Thread David Weinehall
. I think you mean "less typo-prone" here :) Kind regards, David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: eDP Panel Power sequencing PP_DIV register changes

2015-04-30 Thread David Weinehall
(PCH_PP_DIVISOR); In case some future products also lack this register this will quickly end up messy. Maybe it'd be better to add a HAS_PP_DIVISOR(dev) macro or something like that? Kind regards, David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@l

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Avoid GPU hang when coming out of S3 or S4

2015-04-29 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 03:46:46PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 02:38:25PM +, Antoine, Peter wrote: > > So is the plan to push these patches and have follow-on work to cover the > > other paths? > > As this fixes the Bugzilla issue that has been raised. > > You've iden

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/atomic: Don't try to free a NULL state

2015-03-30 Thread David Weinehall
probably make sense to fix all code that uses drm_atomic_state_free() at the same time. Regards, David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] drm/i915: Copy the staged connector config to the legacy atomic state

2015-03-30 Thread David Weinehall
release load detect pipe.\n"); > 9118drm_atomic_state_free(state); > ^ > Dereferenced inside function call. > > 9119} > 9120 Wouldn't it make more sense to make drm_atomic_state_free() follow the same semantics as *free() functions typically do (no operation performed)? Kind regards, David Weinehall ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Disable WaGsvRC0ResidencyMethod for vlv

2015-03-19 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 06:17:00PM +0530, Deepak S wrote: > > > On Thursday 19 March 2015 05:14 PM, David Weinehall wrote: > >On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 04:09:44PM +0530, deepa...@linux.intel.com wrote: > >>From: Deepak S > >> > >>Unfortunately WaGsvRC0Res

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Disable WaGsvRC0ResidencyMethod for vlv

2015-03-19 Thread David Weinehall
27;s OK to use on, or to identif what Baytrail systems it isn't OK to use on? Just reverting this completely seems overly broad if it's possible to tell the difference between working and non-working systems. Kind regards, David Weinehall ___ I

Re: [Intel-gfx] [Beignet] Preventing zero GPU virtual address allocation

2015-03-19 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 03:22:42AM +, Song, Ruiling wrote: > > > Yeah, MAP_FIXED sounds a bit more ambitious and though I think it would > > work for OCL 2.0 pointer sharing, it's a little different than we were > > planning. > > To summarize, we have three possible approaches, each with its

<    1   2   3   4   5   >