On 04/04/2017 14:38, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
Almost all other GuC fw definitions are using GUC|guc prefix.
While around, in get_core_family() change explicit WARN into MISSING_CASE
as it looks more appropriate, since GuC support capability we are controlling
by intel_device_info.has_guc flag.
Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <[email protected]>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <[email protected]>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fwif.h | 4 ++--
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c | 6 +++---
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fwif.h
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fwif.h
index cb36cbf..6156845 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fwif.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fwif.h
@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@
#ifndef _INTEL_GUC_FWIF_H
#define _INTEL_GUC_FWIF_H
-#define GFXCORE_FAMILY_GEN9 12
-#define GFXCORE_FAMILY_UNKNOWN 0x7fffffff
+#define GUC_CORE_FAMILY_GEN9 12
+#define GUC_CORE_FAMILY_UNKNOWN 0x7fffffff
#define GUC_CLIENT_PRIORITY_KMD_HIGH 0
#define GUC_CLIENT_PRIORITY_HIGH 1
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c
index 8a1a023..2793c01 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c
@@ -86,11 +86,11 @@ static u32 get_core_family(struct drm_i915_private
*dev_priv)
switch (gen) {
case 9:
- return GFXCORE_FAMILY_GEN9;
+ return GUC_CORE_FAMILY_GEN9;
default:
- WARN(1, "GEN%d does not support GuC operation!\n", gen);
- return GFXCORE_FAMILY_UNKNOWN;
+ MISSING_CASE(gen);
+ return GUC_CORE_FAMILY_UNKNOWN;
}
}
I agree that this is much more appropriate error handling for this
layer. Prefix also makes sense.
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
