From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: PIPE_CONTROL TLB invalidation fix
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 20:32:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKMK7uF5=HufxjqT0mbsNXD40M85eXBr-dc605e5yfggVnwfzQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120727105714.752514a0@stallone.kumite>
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 07:17:36 +0200
> Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 04:48:43PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>> > The IVB simulator really doesn't like a TLB invalidate with no
>> > post-sync operation, in fact it blows up in an assertion failure.
>> > The documentation states that we must issue the TLB invalidate with
>> > a CS stall: "Also Requires stall bit ([20] of DW1) set." This patch
>> > doesn't comply with the docs, but we're able to satisfy the
>> > simulator with this very small change, and I think simulator has
>> > historically trumped docs.
>> >
>> > Note, I don't think this belongs in stable as our TLB invalidation
>> > should be correct since we use the global invalidation per batch.
>> > Using TLB invalidation is itself only a requirement of HW contexts.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
>>
>> I have another patch from Chris that kills the non-zero post-sync op
>> workaround for ivb ... So I guess we can't do this this easily.
>> -Daniel
>
> Rethink this. The need to emit the TLB invalidation as the simulator
> dictates essentially means we cannot remove the workaround as
> Chris' patch does.
Afaik that "tlb needs a non-zero post-sync op" just means that we need
to have a non-zero post-sync op in the pipe_control cmd with the tlb
set. Whereas the gen6 wa dictatest that we need a nonzero postsync op
_before_ the pipe_control that sets the render flush bit. So I'm still
playing the dense here and don't see the connection (besides that we
can abuse the w/a nonzero postsync op to also make the tlb flush
happy).
So can't we just set add w/a nonzeor postsync op for gen7 to make the
simulator happy?
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch - +41 (0) 79 364 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-05 18:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-26 23:48 [PATCH] drm/i915: PIPE_CONTROL TLB invalidation fix Ben Widawsky
2012-07-27 5:17 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-07-27 17:57 ` Ben Widawsky
2012-08-05 18:32 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2012-08-06 1:33 ` Ben Widawsky
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='CAKMK7uF5=HufxjqT0mbsNXD40M85eXBr-dc605e5yfggVnwfzQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=ben@bwidawsk.net \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).