From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] drm/i915/guc: Clean up locks in GuC
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:11:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160126171152.GS8281@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160126165421.GD11240@phenom.ffwll.local>
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 05:54:21PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:08:37PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:53:45AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > > Chris Harris has liaised with Tomi and apparently GuC firmware is
> > > already on the lab SKLs from ~two weeks ago.
> > >
> > > Since the firmware is on all machines, presumably we would also want
> > > to have CI runs without the GuC enabled to ensure patches are not
> > > breaking the execlists mode?
> > >
> > > How would you go about that? Submit patch series twice? Once with
> > > the final "enable GuC" patch and one without?
> >
> > After the enable GuC patch, execlists will still be triggered on
> > machines without the right firmware. We either remove the firmware from
> > the CI image for that run, or reboot with i915.enable_guc=0
> >
> > Yes, we should be checking that both modes "still" function.
>
> Since guc mode will be for skl only bdw will still do execlist tests for
> us. I think that should be good enough. But I've heard also that the
> private patch submission is coming along, so you could submit a 2nd time
> without the "enable guc" patch.
Since skl doesn't pass igt, I think it is presumptuous that will be
fixed first if the results are totally ignored.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-26 17:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-20 0:15 [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Keep irq enabled during GuC cmd submission yu.dai
2015-11-20 8:45 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-23 23:02 ` [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Move wait for GuC out of spinlock/unlock yu.dai
2015-11-24 13:04 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-24 13:26 ` Imre Deak
2015-11-24 17:00 ` Yu Dai
2015-11-24 17:05 ` Imre Deak
2015-11-24 18:08 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-24 18:36 ` Yu Dai
2015-11-24 19:13 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-24 22:34 ` Yu Dai
2015-11-25 8:45 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-25 19:29 ` [PATCH v2] drm/i915/guc: Clean up locks in GuC yu.dai
2015-11-26 9:16 ` Nick Hoath
2015-12-01 0:15 ` [PATCH v3] " yu.dai
2015-12-02 19:50 ` Dave Gordon
2015-12-03 0:56 ` [PATCH v4] " yu.dai
2015-12-03 7:52 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-01-22 10:54 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-01-25 16:01 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-01-26 11:53 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-01-26 12:08 ` Chris Wilson
2016-01-26 16:54 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-01-26 17:11 ` Chris Wilson [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160126171152.GS8281@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com \
--to=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.