[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: simplify check for I915G/I945G in bit 6 swizzling detection

[Jani Nikula]

On Wed, 14 Dec 2016, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 02:00:11PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 01:10:59PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> > c9c4b6f6c283 ("drm/i915: fix swizzle detection for gen3") added a
>> > complicated check for I915G/I945G. Pineview and other gen3 devices match
>> > IS_MOBILE() anyway. Simplify.
>> > 
>> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch>
>> > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c | 3 +--
>> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> > 
>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>> > index 09193cfb5d8b..e03983973252 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_fence_reg.c
>> > @@ -513,8 +513,7 @@ i915_gem_detect_bit_6_swizzle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>> >  		swizzle_x = I915_BIT_6_SWIZZLE_NONE;
>> >  		swizzle_y = I915_BIT_6_SWIZZLE_NONE;
>> >  	} else if (IS_MOBILE(dev_priv) ||
>> > -		   (IS_GEN3(dev_priv) &&
>> > -		    !IS_G33(dev_priv) && !IS_PINEVIEW(dev_priv))) {
>> > +		   IS_I915G(dev_priv) || IS_I945G(dev_priv)) {
>> 
>> Seems to miss i915gm and i945gm. Hm, but then you mention those are
>> mobile. Then I guess it's a bikeshed, but at least a correct one.
>
> Considering the discussion over the last few days, I'd rather see
> IS_MOBILE() phased out and not relied upon even more.
> /bikeshed

I'm afraid I already pushed (thanks for the review Daniel).

Last I looked, IS_MOBILE() seems like difficult to untangle, and this is
not one of the hard spots. Simpler conditions should actually be
helpful.

BR,
Jani.



-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center