Re: [PATCH 1/4] drm/i915: export assert_device_not_suspended

Imre Deak
2015-11-09T18:43:33Z

On ma, 2015-11-09 at 20:30 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 08:20:08PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote:
> > We should use the same assert in more places, so export it. Move it
> > to
> > intel_runtime_pm.c at the same time, since that's a more logical
> > place
> > for it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 2 ++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c | 6 ++++++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 7 -------
> > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> > index f9089df..373cc07 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> > @@ -1415,6 +1415,8 @@ void intel_display_power_get(struct
> > drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > enum intel_display_power_domain
> > domain);
> > void intel_display_power_put(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > enum intel_display_power_domain
> > domain);
> > +
> > +void assert_device_not_suspended(struct drm_i915_private
> > *dev_priv);
> > void intel_runtime_pm_get(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > void intel_runtime_pm_get_noresume(struct drm_i915_private
> > *dev_priv);
> > void intel_runtime_pm_put(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c
> > index b42506b..0d4a03b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c
> > @@ -2120,6 +2120,12 @@ void intel_power_domains_init_hw(struct
> > drm_i915_private *dev_priv, bool resume)
> > power_domains->initializing = false;
> > }
> >
> > +void assert_device_not_suspended(struct drm_i915_private
> > *dev_priv)
> > +{
> > + WARN_ONCE(HAS_RUNTIME_PM(dev_priv->dev) && dev_priv
> > ->pm.suspended,
>
> Is there any point in the HAS_RUNTIME_PM() check?

All other platforms should have pm.suspended = false and a non-zero
refcount all the time, so I guess not. I can remove it in patch 3/4.

>
> > + "Device suspended\n");
> > +}
> > +
> > /**
> > * intel_power_domains_suspend - suspend power domain state
> > * @dev_priv: i915 device instance
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> > index 5bb269c..2b93a68 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> > @@ -50,13 +50,6 @@ intel_uncore_forcewake_domain_to_str(const enum
> > forcewake_domain_id id)
> > return "unknown";
> > }
> >
> > -static void
> > -assert_device_not_suspended(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > -{
> > - WARN_ONCE(HAS_RUNTIME_PM(dev_priv->dev) && dev_priv
> > ->pm.suspended,
> > - "Device suspended\n");
> > -}
> > -
> > static inline void
> > fw_domain_reset(const struct intel_uncore_forcewake_domain *d)
> > {
> > --
> > 2.5.0
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx