linux-kernel - Re: [Intel-gfx] [Xen-devel] [RFC][PATCH] gpu:drm:i915:intel_detect_pch: back to check devfn instead of check class type

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140712101302.GT17271@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:	Sat, 12 Jul 2014 12:13:02 +0200
From:	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:	"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Cc:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"airlied@...ux.ie" <airlied@...ux.ie>,
	"intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"qemu-devel@...gnu.org" <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
	"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	"Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@...el.com>,
	"Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [Xen-devel] [RFC][PATCH]
 gpu:drm:i915:intel_detect_pch: back to check devfn instead of check class
 type

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 08:30:59PM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [mailto:konrad.wilk@...cle.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 12:42 PM
> > 
> > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 08:29:56AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 09:08:24PM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > actually I'm curious whether it's still necessary to __detect__ PCH. Could
> > > > we assume a 1:1 mapping between GPU and PCH, e.g. BDW already hard
> > > > code the knowledge:
> > > >
> > > >               } else if (IS_BROADWELL(dev)) {
> > > >                       dev_priv->pch_type = PCH_LPT;
> > > >                       dev_priv->pch_id =
> > > >
> > INTEL_PCH_LPT_LP_DEVICE_ID_TYPE;
> > > >                       DRM_DEBUG_KMS("This is Broadwell,
> > assuming "
> > > >                                     "LynxPoint LP PCH\n");
> > > >
> > > > Or if there is real usage on non-fixed mapping (not majority), could it be a
> > > > better option to have fixed mapping as a fallback instead of leaving as
> > > > PCH_NONE? Then even when Qemu doesn't provide a special tweaked
> > PCH,
> > > > the majority case just works.
> > >
> > > I guess we can do it, at least I haven't seen any strange combinations in
> > > the wild outside of Intel ...
> > 
> > How big is the QA matrix for this? Would it make sense to just
> > include the latest hardware (say going two generations back)
> > and ignore the older one?
> 
> suppose minimal or no QA effort on bare metal, if we only conservatively 
> change the fallback path which is today not supposed to function with 
> PCH_NONE. so it's only same amount of QA effort as whatever else is 
> proposed in this passthru upstreaming task. I agree no need to cover 
> older model, possibly just snb, ivb and hsw, but will leave Tiejun to answer 
> the overall goal.

Yeah, I'd be ok with the approach of using defaults if we can't recognize
the pch - if anyone screams we can either quirk or figure something else
out.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/