[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] fix interrupt request miss problem in bsd ring for g4x

[Feng, Boqun]

Err...I just send another two patches before read this letter. : )

Ironlake and g4x share the same bsd_ring, so they share the same
bsd_ring_put/get_irq functions of the ring. Given this, we can't just
change the function name to g4x_ring_put/get_irq. If we do so, we
need ironlake_ring_put/get_irq, too.
So I just use a if-else in bsd_ring_*_irq to find out the version of the
chipset and do different work.
Is that OK?


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Wilson [mailto:chris at chris-wilson.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 3:39 PM
To: Feng, Boqun; intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] fix interrupt request miss problem in bsd ring for g4x

On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:08:57 +0800, "Feng, Boqun" <boqun.feng at intel.com> wrote:
> I am very sorry for my careless about whitespace.
> 
> But my patch will not affect gen6+ paths, for gen6+, it use gen6_bsd_ring
> , bsd_ring is only used by g4x and ironlake.

Reviewer error, sorry. Saw the gen6_* in the diff header as the function
affected and believed it.

> Besides, since bsd_ring_get_irq/bsd_ring_put_irq/ring_get_irq/ring_put_irq 
> are only used by bsd_ring, can we use a patch to merge them into two function? 
Yes, once upon a time they differed, now they are the same so please do
merge them and give them a more useful name: g4x_ring_* so that there is a
constant reminder that g4x also has a BSD ring and that the functions are
not expected to be used with earlier chipsets.

Daniel has done similar things for gen6 once we decided to drop the
pre-production workarounds.

Obviously that is a separate patch to the bug fix.  Thanks,
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre