From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 7/9] drm/xe/gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt: Call xe_force_wake_put if xe_force_wake_get succeds
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 15:37:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZtoIk-OUD7qkBvKn@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240830052326.3707019-8-himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 10:53:24AM +0530, Himal Prasad Ghimiray wrote:
> A failure in xe_force_wake_get() no longer increments the domain's
> refcount, so xe_force_wake_put() should not be called in such cases
>
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
> index cca9cf536f76..3f86ab704c4f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
> @@ -259,11 +259,11 @@ static int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_guc(struct xe_gt *gt,
> int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> {
> struct xe_device *xe = gt_to_xe(gt);
> + int ret;
>
> if (xe_guc_ct_enabled(>->uc.guc.ct) &&
> gt->uc.guc.submission_state.enabled) {
> struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence fence;
> - int ret;
>
> xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_init(gt, &fence, true);
> ret = xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_guc(gt, &fence);
> @@ -277,7 +277,9 @@ int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> if (IS_SRIOV_VF(xe))
> return 0;
>
> - xe_gt_WARN_ON(gt, xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT));
> + ret = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
> + xe_gt_WARN_ON(gt, ret);
> +
> if (xe->info.platform == XE_PVC || GRAPHICS_VER(xe) >= 20) {
> xe_mmio_write32(gt, PVC_GUC_TLB_INV_DESC1,
> PVC_GUC_TLB_INV_DESC1_INVALIDATE);
> @@ -287,7 +289,8 @@ int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> xe_mmio_write32(gt, GUC_TLB_INV_CR,
> GUC_TLB_INV_CR_INVALIDATE);
> }
> - xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
> + if (!ret)
> + xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
looking all these cases now I honestly prefer the other way around.
If we called the get, we call the put.
get always increase the reference and put does the clean-up.
fw_ref = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), fw_ref);
so, the fw_ref is a mask of the woken up cases which require
the ref drop and sleep call.
> }
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.34.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-05 19:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-30 5:23 [RFC 0/9] Fix xe_force_wake_get() failure handling Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:18 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:18 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:19 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 1/9] drm/xe: Error handling in xe_force_wake_get() Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 6:37 ` Jani Nikula
2024-08-30 6:45 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-05 19:29 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-05 20:02 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-06 16:18 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-10 18:27 ` Nilawar, Badal
2024-09-11 6:51 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-11 6:40 ` Upadhyay, Tejas
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 2/9] drm/xe: Ensure __must_check for xe_force_wake_get() return Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-05 19:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 3/9] drm/xe/gsc: call xe_force_wake_put() only if xe_force_wake_get() succeeds Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 4/9] drm/xe/gt: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 5/9] drm/xe/guc: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 6/9] drm/xe/oa: Handle force_wake_get failure in xe_oa_stream_init() Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 7/9] drm/xe/gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt: Call xe_force_wake_put if xe_force_wake_get succeds Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-05 19:37 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2024-09-05 19:51 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-06 16:29 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-09 9:29 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-10 14:37 ` Nilawar, Badal
2024-09-10 17:39 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-10 17:53 ` Nilawar, Badal
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 8/9] drm/xe: Change return type to void for xe_force_wake_put Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 9/9] drm/xe: forcewake debugfs open fails on xe_forcewake_get failure Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:32 ` ✓ CI.Build: success for Fix xe_force_wake_get() failure handling Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:37 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:42 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 6:05 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 17:41 ` ✓ CI.FULL: " 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=ZtoIk-OUD7qkBvKn@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@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.