From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2BFCC11F68 for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 08:09:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BAE46128E for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 08:09:57 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7BAE46128E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=free.fr Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11A2489FF6; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 08:09:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp5-g21.free.fr (smtp5-g21.free.fr [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::14]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB25489FF6; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 08:09:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.71] (unknown [91.155.165.229]) (Authenticated sender: martin.peres@free.fr) by smtp5-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 825135FFCA; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 10:09:43 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=free.fr; s=smtp-20201208; t=1625213393; bh=6ZgF9aZ6prdbYkVu58icJFP+9DLuPqjk2lTqE0RxLtA=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=M7YlAlsfM53BAw9DHnwNw4MgGjigBpNob92nkMutTdTVZZ3w0e2ZYv7iRxwH4wfaU 2mbspNriCbMkYxi85dTFWJD6Lg+iwYqRY7UVRiPq8cKx9vGvxKmpZgb/+hae2hf8C5 2zZvCTPuyAWQHTd3IcEqxkFBI1VCHwnfulEgRyo7jTWF9+svzIw8VJZu5VA35hXC4k bmoUJ9P0BdIT1XBXHRPhGiaRXgFPircZfa+dnQyLkyJojaW6CHxSx+lQPk+Pex2dtF yE8IAynVoZ0Pl11FOjlLek9qfRJ6YjVAJphnFJUrfnU8b+vh05lLOJk2lHVNSQKw/T BhdXpJ8w2GjNw== To: Pekka Paalanen , Daniel Vetter References: <20210624070516.21893-1-matthew.brost@intel.com> <20210624070516.21893-48-matthew.brost@intel.com> <88cbe963-7188-f4ae-5acf-01a80bd2fe25@free.fr> <05e1d462-57ae-888a-888c-3ad486150821@intel.com> <20210701111410.3fc6551e@eldfell> <050296b9-8958-353a-9f76-699bfbafa1c1@free.fr> <20210702102944.3a8c4915@eldfell> From: Martin Peres Message-ID: <2d3b06c3-5f69-5045-191f-3fd705a3fb40@free.fr> Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 11:09:43 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210702102944.3a8c4915@eldfell> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 47/47] drm/i915/guc: Unblock GuC submission on Gen11+ X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: intel-gfx , dri-devel Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On 02/07/2021 10:29, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 21:28:06 +0200 > Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 8:27 PM Martin Peres wrote: >>> >>> On 01/07/2021 11:14, Pekka Paalanen wrote: >>>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:58:25 -0700 >>>> John Harrison wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 6/30/2021 01:22, Martin Peres wrote: >>>>>> On 24/06/2021 10:05, Matthew Brost wrote: >>>>>>> From: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Unblock GuC submission on Gen11+ platforms. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc.h | 1 + >>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 8 ++++++++ >>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h | 3 +-- >>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 14 +++++++++----- >>>>>>> 4 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>> >>>> ... >>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c >>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c >>>>>>> index 7a69c3c027e9..61be0aa81492 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c >>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c >>>>>>> @@ -34,8 +34,15 @@ static void uc_expand_default_options(struct >>>>>>> intel_uc *uc) >>>>>>> return; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> - /* Default: enable HuC authentication only */ >>>>>>> - i915->params.enable_guc = ENABLE_GUC_LOAD_HUC; >>>>>>> + /* Intermediate platforms are HuC authentication only */ >>>>>>> + if (IS_DG1(i915) || IS_ALDERLAKE_S(i915)) { >>>>>>> + drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "Disabling GuC only due to old >>>>>>> platform\n"); >>>>>> >>>>>> This comment does not seem accurate, given that DG1 is barely out, and >>>>>> ADL is not out yet. How about: >>>>>> >>>>>> "Disabling GuC on untested platforms"? >>>>>> >>>>> Just because something is not in the shops yet does not mean it is new. >>>>> Technology is always obsolete by the time it goes on sale. >>>> >>>> That is a very good reason to not use terminology like "new", "old", >>>> "current", "modern" etc. at all. >>>> >>>> End users like me definitely do not share your interpretation of "old". >>> >>> Yep, old and new is relative. In the end, what matters is the validation >>> effort, which is why I was proposing "untested platforms". >>> >>> Also, remember that you are not writing these messages for Intel >>> engineers, but instead are writing for Linux *users*. >> >> It's drm_dbg. Users don't read this stuff, at least not users with no >> clue what the driver does and stuff like that. > > If I had a problem, I would read it, and I have no clue what anything > of that is. Exactly. This level of defense for what is clearly a bad *debug* message (at the very least, the grammar) makes no sense at all! I don't want to hear arguments like "Not my patch" from a developer literally sending the patch to the ML and who added his SoB to the patch, playing with words, or minimizing the problem of having such a message. All of the above are just clear signals for the community to get off your playground, which is frankly unacceptable. Your email address does not matter. In the spirit of collaboration, your response should have been "Good catch, how about XXXX or YYYY?". This would not have wasted everyone's time in an attempt to just have it your way. My level of confidence in this GuC transition was already low, but you guys are working hard to shoot yourself in the foot. Trust should be earned! Martin > > > Thanks, > pq > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx