From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/ilk: special case enabling of
 PCU_EVENT interrupt
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 11:52:56 -0700
Message-ID: <20140826115256.432fc8b4@jbarnes-desktop>
References: <1409009095-3621-1-git-send-email-jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
 <20140826072354.GY15520@phenom.ffwll.local>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-pd0-f169.google.com (mail-pd0-f169.google.com
 [209.85.192.169])
 by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 934C66E27E
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 11:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f169.google.com with SMTP id y10so22894426pdj.0
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 11:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140826072354.GY15520@phenom.ffwll.local>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
 <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
 <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Sender: "Intel-gfx" <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: socketcan@hartkopp.net, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:23:54 +0200
Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 04:24:55PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > This happens in irq_postinstall before we've set the pm._irqs_disabled flag,
> > but shouldn't warn.  So add a nowarn variant to allow this to happen w/o
> > a backtrace and keep the rest of the IRQ tracking code happy.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
> 
> Shouldn't we instead just move the pm._irqs_disabled = false in i915_dma.c
> right above the drm_irq_install call? In
> intel_runtime_pm_restore_interrupts we also set it to false before we call
> the various hooks.

I didn't check on all the paths whether that was safe, we have a lot of
warnings.

And really this init time thing is a special case, so it made sense to
me.

> Also the commit message is a bit thin on the usual details like which
> commits introduced this regression, so that maintainers know where to
> apply this to.

I don't have the commit...  Oliver do you have it handy?

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center