From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Damien Lespiau Subject: Re: [PATCH 43/89] drm/i915/skl: Read the Memory Latency Values for WM computation Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 13:56:56 +0100 Message-ID: <20140905125656.GJ24533@strange.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1409830075-11139-1-git-send-email-damien.lespiau@intel.com> <1409830075-11139-44-git-send-email-damien.lespiau@intel.com> <20140905082530.GR4193@intel.com> <20140905082933.GE24533@strange.ger.corp.intel.com> <20140905084232.GS4193@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB1FF6E872 for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2014 05:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140905084232.GS4193@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Pradeep Bhat List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:42:32AM +0300, Ville Syrj=E4l=E4 wrote: > On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 09:29:33AM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:25:30AM +0300, Ville Syrj=E4l=E4 wrote: > > > > +/* SKL GT Driver Mailbox registers for reading memory latencies */ > > > > +#define GEN9_MAILBOX_DATA1 0x13812C > > > > +#define GEN9_MAILBOX_READ_MEM_LAT (0x6) > > > > +#define GEN9_MAILBOX_READ_TIMEOUT 150 > > > = > > > Timeout not used anywhere. Also spec says 100us. > > > = > > > > +#define GEN9_MEM_LAT_LEVEL_MASK 0xFF > > > > +#define GEN9_MEM_LAT_LEVEL_1_5_SHIFT 8 > > > > +#define GEN9_MEM_LAT_LEVEL_2_6_SHIFT 16 > > > > +#define GEN9_MEM_LAT_LEVEL_3_7_SHIFT 24 > > > = > > > This stuff should be grouped along the other pcode register defines. > > = > > Funny you mention this, I fixed those two in the v6 sent as reply > > yesterday. > = > Well that's two down then. The other 2 items were marked as "patch on top is fine/better", so I guess it's now r-b material? In any case, addressed the 2 points you raised separately. http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2014-September/052008.html -- = Damien