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

[Souza, Jose]

On Tue, 2020-03-03 at 12:39 -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> 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.

Also we are blocked until 
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1233 is fixed, Joonas
and Jon Bloomfield advised that.

> 
> > 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