[PATCH 1/9] drm/xe/xe3: Xe3 uses the same PAT settings as Xe2

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 06:39:38PM GMT, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 02:51:45PM -0700, Matt Atwood wrote:
>> From: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com>
>>
>> Xe3 platforms use the same PAT tables as Xe2.
>>
>> Bspec: 71582
>> Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Matt Atwood <matthew.s.atwood at intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pat.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pat.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pat.c
>> index f291a1730024..aad9345180e8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pat.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pat.c
>> @@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ static const struct xe_pat_ops xe2_pat_ops = {
>>
>>  void xe_pat_init_early(struct xe_device *xe)
>>  {
>> -	if (GRAPHICS_VER(xe) == 20) {
>> +	if (GRAPHICS_VER(xe) == 30 || GRAPHICS_VER(xe) == 20) {
>
>In the past we would just start with ' >=' assuming the next platform
>is the same and handle differently only if needed. But I guess that on
>the other side we would take a while to find out the wrong assumptions,
>right?

with xe2 the check with == was intentional since this is an area that
needs to be checked for any new platform and we can't simply assume the
same for next platforms. Same reasoning here, even if xe3 happened to
use the same table.

Lucas De Marchi

>
>Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
>
>>  		xe->pat.ops = &xe2_pat_ops;
>>  		xe->pat.table = xe2_pat_table;
>>
>> --
>> 2.44.0
>>