| Message ID | 20220413105827.2346571-1-tejaskumarx.surendrakumar.upadhyay@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | drm/i915/adl-n: Differentiate ADLP and ADLN steppings | expand |
Hello, Can anyone review please? Pre-merge failure is not related to the patch. Thanks, Tejas > -----Original Message----- > From: Surendrakumar Upadhyay, TejaskumarX > <tejaskumarx.surendrakumar.upadhyay@intel.com> > Sent: 13 April 2022 16:28 > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: Surendrakumar Upadhyay, TejaskumarX > <tejaskumarx.surendrakumar.upadhyay@intel.com> > Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915/adl-n: Differentiate ADLP and ADLN steppings > > ADL-N and ADL-P stepping are different, thus we need to add check for ADL- > N in IS_ADLP_DISPLAY_STEP(). > > Signed-off-by: Tejas Upadhyay > <tejaskumarx.surendrakumar.upadhyay@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h index 9274417cd87a..51f2a14b0dca > 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > @@ -1167,7 +1167,7 @@ IS_SUBPLATFORM(const struct drm_i915_private > *i915, > IS_GRAPHICS_STEP(__i915, since, until)) > > #define IS_ADLP_DISPLAY_STEP(__i915, since, until) \ > - (IS_ALDERLAKE_P(__i915) && \ > + (IS_ALDERLAKE_P(__i915) && !IS_ADLP_N(__i915) &&\ > IS_DISPLAY_STEP(__i915, since, until)) > > #define IS_ADLP_GRAPHICS_STEP(__i915, since, until) \ > -- > 2.34.1
On Wed, 2022-04-13 at 16:28 +0530, Tejas Upadhyay wrote: > ADL-N and ADL-P stepping are different, thus we > need to add check for ADL-N in IS_ADLP_DISPLAY_STEP(). > > Signed-off-by: Tejas Upadhyay <tejaskumarx.surendrakumar.upadhyay@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > index 9274417cd87a..51f2a14b0dca 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > @@ -1167,7 +1167,7 @@ IS_SUBPLATFORM(const struct drm_i915_private *i915, > IS_GRAPHICS_STEP(__i915, since, until)) > > #define IS_ADLP_DISPLAY_STEP(__i915, since, until) \ > - (IS_ALDERLAKE_P(__i915) && \ > + (IS_ALDERLAKE_P(__i915) && !IS_ADLP_N(__i915) &&\ > IS_DISPLAY_STEP(__i915, since, until)) Where is the ADLN_DISPLAY_STEP checks then? My understanding it that ADLN is ADLS GT + ADLP display, so this looks wrong. Also RPL is already a derivated platform of ADL, so RPL has subplatform bit 0 and and INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_N is using the same bit so alderlake-N will use the same code paths as RPL what is again wrong. > > #define IS_ADLP_GRAPHICS_STEP(__i915, since, until) \
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h index 9274417cd87a..51f2a14b0dca 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h @@ -1167,7 +1167,7 @@ IS_SUBPLATFORM(const struct drm_i915_private *i915, IS_GRAPHICS_STEP(__i915, since, until)) #define IS_ADLP_DISPLAY_STEP(__i915, since, until) \ - (IS_ALDERLAKE_P(__i915) && \ + (IS_ALDERLAKE_P(__i915) && !IS_ADLP_N(__i915) &&\ IS_DISPLAY_STEP(__i915, since, until)) #define IS_ADLP_GRAPHICS_STEP(__i915, since, until) \
ADL-N and ADL-P stepping are different, thus we need to add check for ADL-N in IS_ADLP_DISPLAY_STEP(). Signed-off-by: Tejas Upadhyay <tejaskumarx.surendrakumar.upadhyay@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)