[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/tgl: Remove require_force_probe protection

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 12:26:34PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 3:07 PM José Roberto de Souza
> <jose.souza at intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > We have a few TGL machines in our CI and it is mostly green with
> > failures in tests that will not impact future Linux installations.
> > Also there is no warnings, errors, flickering or any visual defects
> > while doing ordinary tasks like browsing and editing documents in a
> > dual monitor setup.
> >
> > As a reminder i915.require_force_probe was created to protect
> > future Linux installation's iso images that might contain a
> > kernel from the enabling time of the new platform. Without this
> > protection most of linux installation was recommending
> > nomodeset option during installation that was getting stick
> > there after installation.
> >
> > Reference: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/fi-tgl-u.html
> > Reference: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/shard-tglb.html
> > Cc: James Ausmus <james.ausmus at intel.com>
> > Cc: Jani Saarinen <jani.saarinen at intel.com>
> > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza at intel.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
> 
> Also, I think it would be good to have this in 5.6 rather than 5.7.
> Yes, it's late in the merge window, but it falls in the case of "New
> device IDs and quirks are also accepted." of the stable kernel rules,
> so could as well just go directly to this kernel. Rodrigo, is it
> possible?

Jani is on charge of the 5.6 so I will defer this decision to him.

But in general we always refused to do this because this is a enabling
kind of thing and not a fix per say. Okay, you might argue that it is
a device ID and that would be accepted on stable so why not also on
fixes cycle, but my fear is that we haven't properly validated that
on 5.6 without the many changes, fixes and workarounds that are
only going towards 5.7 and not 5.6.

> 
> thanks
> Lucas De Marchi
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c | 1 -
> >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
> > index 24b1f0ce8743..2146b9a865ba 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pci.c
> > @@ -822,7 +822,6 @@ static const struct intel_device_info tgl_info = {
> >         GEN12_FEATURES,
> >         PLATFORM(INTEL_TIGERLAKE),
> >         .pipe_mask = BIT(PIPE_A) | BIT(PIPE_B) | BIT(PIPE_C) | BIT(PIPE_D),
> > -       .require_force_probe = 1,
> >         .display.has_modular_fia = 1,
> >         .engine_mask =
> >                 BIT(RCS0) | BIT(BCS0) | BIT(VECS0) | BIT(VCS0) | BIT(VCS2),
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Lucas De Marchi