On 06/06/2019 11:01, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-06-06 10:36:29)
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
Gen8+ does not have swizziling so function will exit on the top most check.
At the same time convert the BUG to MISSING_CASE for a little more debug
info.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 8eee9ecf0adf..7512c804d4b7 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -1216,10 +1216,8 @@ void i915_gem_init_swizzling(struct drm_i915_private
*dev_priv)
I915_WRITE(ARB_MODE, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(ARB_MODE_SWIZZLE_SNB));
else if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 7))
I915_WRITE(ARB_MODE, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(ARB_MODE_SWIZZLE_IVB));
- else if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 8))
- I915_WRITE(GAMTARBMODE,
_MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(ARB_MODE_SWIZZLE_BDW));
But that is the register we would need to set if we choose to reenable
swizzling for whatever mysterious reason.
On Gen8 after all this time? I can drop the patch if you think that's a
possibility.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
