[Intel-gfx] gen7 missed IRQ workaround series.

2011-12-22 Thread Eric Anholt
This is the minimal patchset I have for working around the missed IRQs. I've been running it since Monday doing test runs for other work, and it appears to be stable. ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.or

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Work around gen7 BLT ring synchronization issues.

2011-12-22 Thread Eric Anholt
Previous to this commit, testing easily reproduced a failure where the seqno would apparently arrive after the IRQ associated with it, with test programs as simple as: for (;;) { glCopyPixels(0, 0, 1, 1); glFinish(); } Various workarounds we've seen for previous generations didn't work t

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: Do the fallback non-IRQ wait in ring throttle, too.

2011-12-22 Thread Eric Anholt
As a workaround for IRQ synchronization issues in the gen7 BLT ring, we want to turn the two wait functions into polling loops. Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c |4 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Make the fallback IRQ wait not sleep.

2011-12-22 Thread Eric Anholt
The waits we do here are generally so short that sleeping is a bad idea unless we have an IRQ to wake us up. Improves regression test performance from 18 minutes to 3.5 minutes on gen7, which is now consistent with the previous generation. Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i91

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: kill i915_mem.c

2011-12-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
Some decent history digging indicates that this was to be used for the GLX_MESA_allocate_memory extension but never actually implemented for any released i915 userspace code. So just rip it out. Cc: Dave Airlie Cc: Keith Whitwell Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: clear up I915_(READ|WRITE)_NOTRACE confusion

2011-12-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 09:54:27AM -0800, Keith Packard wrote: > On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 01:28:36 +0100, Daniel Vetter > wrote: > > Half of the users actually don't want just no tracing, but need to > > avoid the forcewake dance for correctness. So add new variants > > __I915_READ and __I915_WRITE fo

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: clear up I915_(READ|WRITE)_NOTRACE confusion

2011-12-22 Thread Keith Packard
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 01:28:36 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Half of the users actually don't want just no tracing, but need to > avoid the forcewake dance for correctness. So add new variants > __I915_READ and __I915_WRITE for that. I'd sure like something more descriptive than '__' here. Perhaps

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Set two chicken bits implicated in missed IRQs on Ivybridge.

2011-12-22 Thread Eric Anholt
On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:26:28 -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On 12/21/2011 10:31 AM, Eric Anholt wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > index 8a61b81..1fe0c67 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > +++ b/drivers/