From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
To: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] drm/i915/irq: move i915->irq_lock to display->irq.lock
Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 11:34:30 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o6w4vmy1.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <174656703321.1401.8627403371256302933@intel.com>
On Tue, 06 May 2025, Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> wrote:
> Quoting Jani Nikula (2025-05-06 10:06:50-03:00)
>>Observe that i915->irq_lock is no longer used to protect anything
>>outside of display. Make it a display thing.
>>
>>This allows us to remove the ugly #define irq_lock irq.lock hack from xe
>>compat header.
>>
>>Note that this is slightly more subtle than it first looks. For i915,
>>there's no functional change here. The lock is moved. However, for xe,
>>we'll now have *two* locks, xe->irq.lock and display->irq.lock. These
>>should protect different things, though. Indeed, nesting in the past
>>would've lead to a deadlock because they were the same lock.
>>
>>With the i915 references gone, we can make a handful more files
>>independent of i915_drv.h.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>
> Besides reviewing the patch itself, I also did a git-grep to check for
> lexical references to irq_lock in the code after this patch is applied.
>
> I found 2 references in comments:
>
> (1) A reference to "drm_i915_private::irq_lock" in the comment for member
> detection_work_enabled of struct intel_hotplug. I think we can
> simply refer to "intel_display::irq::lock" now.
>
> (2) A reference to "i915->irq_lock" in a comment inside struct intel_rps.
> Looking at the history, it looks like we started using gt->irq_lock
> with commit d762043f7ab1 ("drm/i915: Extract GT powermanagement
> interrupt handling"), which failed to update the comment. I think
> we can update the comment to make it more accurate. I guess that
> could be on a patch of its own...
Thanks for spotting these!
I sent a separate fix for (2), because it is kind of separate [1].
> So, with the small tweak suggested in (1),
>
> Reviewed-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>
Thanks a lot for the reviews! I took the liberty of tweaking the comment
(1) while applying, and pushed the series to din.
BR,
Jani.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250507083136.1987023-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-07 8:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-06 13:06 [PATCH 0/8] drm/i915: irq_lock refactoring, move to display Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 13:06 ` [PATCH 1/8] drm/i915/irq: move locking inside vlv_display_irq_reset() Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 21:38 ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-05-06 13:06 ` [PATCH 2/8] drm/i915/irq: move locking inside valleyview_{enable, disable}_display_irqs() Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 21:38 ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-05-06 13:06 ` [PATCH 3/8] drm/i915/irq: move locking inside vlv_display_irq_postinstall() Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 21:39 ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-05-06 13:06 ` [PATCH 4/8] drm/i915/irq: split out i915_display_irq_postinstall() Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 21:39 ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-05-06 13:06 ` [PATCH 5/8] drm/i915/irq: split out i965_display_irq_postinstall() Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 21:40 ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-05-06 13:06 ` [PATCH 6/8] drm/i915/irq: make i915_enable_asle_pipestat() static Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 21:40 ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-05-06 13:06 ` [PATCH 7/8] drm/i915/rps: refactor display rps support Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 21:41 ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-05-06 13:06 ` [PATCH 8/8] drm/i915/irq: move i915->irq_lock to display->irq.lock Jani Nikula
2025-05-06 21:30 ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-05-07 8:34 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2025-05-06 13:13 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/i915: irq_lock refactoring, move to display Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:14 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:15 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:23 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:26 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:27 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:32 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning " Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:32 ` ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:54 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2025-05-06 13:58 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-05-06 16:01 ` ✗ i915.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-05-06 16:15 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork
2025-05-26 16:00 ` ✗ CI.Patch_applied: " Patchwork
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=87o6w4vmy1.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=gustavo.sousa@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.