On 04/19/2018 09:37 AM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:43:39 +0200, Yaodong Li
wrote:
On 04/13/2018 09:20 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 02:42:19 +0200, Jackie Li
wrote:
In current code, we only compare the
On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:43:39 +0200, Yaodong Li
wrote:
On 04/13/2018 09:20 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 02:42:19 +0200, Jackie Li
wrote:
In current code, we only compare the locked WOPCM register values with
the
calculated
On 04/13/2018 09:20 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 02:42:19 +0200, Jackie Li
wrote:
In current code, we only compare the locked WOPCM register values
with the
calculated values. However, we can continue loading GuC/HuC firmware
if the
locked (or
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 02:42:19 +0200, Jackie Li wrote:
In current code, we only compare the locked WOPCM register values with
the
calculated values. However, we can continue loading GuC/HuC firmware if
the
locked (or partially locked) values were valid for current
On Mon, 2018-04-09 at 17:42 -0700, Jackie Li wrote:
> In current code, we only compare the locked WOPCM register values
> with the
> calculated values. However, we can continue loading GuC/HuC firmware
> if the
> locked (or partially locked) values were valid for current GuC/HuC
> firmware
>
In current code, we only compare the locked WOPCM register values with the
calculated values. However, we can continue loading GuC/HuC firmware if the
locked (or partially locked) values were valid for current GuC/HuC firmware
sizes.
This patch added a new code path to verify whether the locked