[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/7] Minor revid/stepping and workaround cleanup

[Srivatsa, Anusha]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roper, Matthew D <matthew.d.roper at intel.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2021 4:05 PM
> To: Srivatsa, Anusha <anusha.srivatsa at intel.com>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com>; intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Minor revid/stepping and workaround cleanup
> 
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 11:37:50AM -0700, Srivatsa, Anusha wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com>
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2021 12:33 AM
> > > To: Roper, Matthew D <matthew.d.roper at intel.com>; intel-
> > > gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> > > Cc: Srivatsa, Anusha <anusha.srivatsa at intel.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Minor revid/stepping and workaround cleanup
> > >
> > > On Wed, 07 Jul 2021, Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com> wrote:
> > > > PCI revision IDs don't always map to GT and display IP steppings
> > > > in an intuitive/sensible way.  On many of our recent platforms
> > > > we've switched to using revid->stepping lookup tables with the
> > > > infrastructure in intel_step.c to handle stepping lookups and
> > > > comparisons.  Since it's confusing to have some of our platforms
> > > > using the new lookup tables and some still using old revid
> > > > comparisons, let's migrate all the old platforms over to the table
> > > > approach since that's what we want to standardize on going
> > > > forward.  The only place that revision ID's should really get used
> > > > directly now is when checking to see if we're running on pre-production
> hardware.
> > >
> > > Anusha, Matt, please sort this out between the two of you. :)
> > >
> > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/92257/
> > >
> > @Roper, Matthew D the series doesn't add the steeping table for BXT and
> GLK.
> 
> Right, that was intentional because we don't use the steppings for those
> platforms anywhere in the code.  But if that's changing with your DMC series,
> I can add the tables for those two as well.
> 
Yes, will need GLK and BXT
Thanks

Anusha
> Matt
> 
> >
> > Anusha
> > > BR,
> > > Jani.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Let's also take the opportunity to drop a bit of effectively dead
> > > > code in the workarounds file too.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com>
> > > >
> > > > Matt Roper (7):
> > > >   drm/i915: Make pre-production detection use direct revid comparison
> > > >   drm/i915/skl: Use revid->stepping tables
> > > >   drm/i915/icl: Use revid->stepping tables
> > > >   drm/i915/jsl_ehl: Use revid->stepping tables
> > > >   drm/i915/rkl: Use revid->stepping tables
> > > >   drm/i915/dg1: Use revid->stepping tables
> > > >   drm/i915/cnl: Drop all workarounds
> > > >
> > > >  .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c    |  2 +-
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c |  2 +-
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c      |  4 +-
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_region_lmem.c   |  2 +-
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c   | 81 +++----------------
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c               |  8 +-
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h               | 80 +++---------------
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c               |  2 +-
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_step.c             | 72 +++++++++++++++--
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_step.h             |  7 ++
> > > >  10 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 153 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
> 
> --
> Matt Roper
> Graphics Software Engineer
> VTT-OSGC Platform Enablement
> Intel Corporation
> (916) 356-2795