[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 06/31] drm/i915/execlists: Unify CSB access pointers
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Wed Jun 27 13:03:07 UTC 2018
On 27/06/2018 11:35, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-06-27 10:52:45)
>>
>> On 25/06/2018 10:48, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> @@ -1109,16 +1089,11 @@ static void process_csb(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
>>> } else {
>>> port_set(port, port_pack(rq, count));
>>> }
>>> - }
>>> + } while (head != tail);
>>>
>>> - if (head != execlists->csb_head) {
>>> - execlists->csb_head = head;
>>> - writel(_MASKED_FIELD(GEN8_CSB_READ_PTR_MASK, head << 8),
>>> - i915->regs + i915_mmio_reg_offset(RING_CONTEXT_STATUS_PTR(engine)));
>>> - }
>>> -
>>> - if (unlikely(fw))
>>> - intel_uncore_forcewake_put(i915, execlists->fw_domains);
>>> + writel(_MASKED_FIELD(GEN8_CSB_READ_PTR_MASK, head << 8),
>>> + execlists->csb_read);
>>
>> Continuing from the last round - so what to do with this one? It does
>> need forcewake. So I think it needs to go if we are claiming there is no
>> mmio any longer.
>
> From last round, we decided it didn't, or at least concluded the
> (from the lack of) evidence that it does not, because we are not using
> forcewake right now...
But we are not sure if our writes stick 100% of the time due using the
HWSP path. And we are wasting time on MMIO for nothing. Put an "if
(execlists->csb_use_mmio)" on it?
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list