On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Ben Skeggs <skeg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Thierry Reding
> <thierry.red...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 05:42:33PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>>> GK20A does not embed a dedicated COPY engine and thus cannot allocate
>>> the copy channel that nouveau_accel_init() attempts to create. It also
>>> lacks any display hardware, so the creation of a software channel does
>>> not apply neither.
>>
>> Perhaps this should be two separate patches?
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
>> [...]
>>> + if (device->chipset == 0xea) {
>>> + /* gk20a does not have CE0/CE1 */
>>
>> This would be another good candidate for a feature flag.
> There are ways to query this in a chipset-independent way. However,
> despite reporting it as an error if no copy engines are available, the
> code should continue on without the channel happily. Perhaps we can
> just punt the relevent error messages to a debug loglevel for now?
Do you know how to query this in a chipset-independant way? I have
failed to find any information for this.
The code does continue without any issue after reporting the error, so
indeed that check is not strictly necessary. But I was just mimicking
what follows right after:
if (device->chipset >= 0xa3 &&
device->chipset != 0xaa &&
device->chipset != 0xac) {
ret = nouveau_channel_new(drm, &drm->client, NVDRM_DEVICE,
NVDRM_CHAN + 1, NvDmaFB, NvDmaTT,
&drm->cechan);
if (ret)
NV_ERROR(drm, "failed to create ce channel, %d\n", ret);
arg0 = NvDmaFB;
arg1 = NvDmaTT;
} else {
arg0 = NvDmaFB;
arg1 = NvDmaTT;
}
So if we are trying to avoid showing this error for 0xa0 class
devices, why not for NV_E0?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
