[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: symbolic names for user load/submission preferences

[Chris Wilson]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 06:12:40PM +0100, Dave Gordon wrote:
> The existing code that accesses the "enable_guc_loading" and
> "enable_guc_submission" parameters uses explicit numerical
> values for the various possibilities, including in some cases
> relying on boolean 0/1 mapping to specific values (which could
> be confusing for maintainers).
> 
> So this patch just provides and uses names for the values
> representing the DEFAULT, DISABLED, PREFERRED, and MANDATORY
> options that the user can select (-1, 0, 1, 2 respectively).

When is MANDATORY a good idea? If the hw doesn't support any other
mechanism, then it will shut itself down gracefully if setup fails. If
the user wants to force guc for testing, they only need to set the
module parameter then check the guc is enabled afterwards and fail the
test. At what point do we need such a warty user interface to the kernel?
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre