From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: GMBUS don't need no forcewake
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 15:39:47 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161012123947.GW4329@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161012115834.GD3885@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:58:34PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 02:44:47PM +0300, ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> >
> > GMBUS is part of the display engine, and thus has no need for
> > forcewake. Let's not bother trying to grab it then.
> >
> > I don't recall if the display engine suffers from system hangs
> > due to multiple accesses to the same "cacheline" in mmio space.
> > I hope not since we're no longer protected by the uncore lock
> > since commit 4e6c2d58ba86 ("drm/i915: Take forcewake once for
> > the entire GMBUS transaction")
>
> Only applies to concurrent access to the same cacheline, in this case
> should be serialised by the mutex around the gmbus xfer.
Hmm. Yeah, I suppose there shouldn't be unrelated stuff nearby. Haven't
double checked though.
>
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c | 5 -----
> > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > index 79aab9ad6faa..49c7824a4c29 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > @@ -468,13 +468,9 @@ do_gmbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adapter, struct i2c_msg *msgs, int num)
> > struct intel_gmbus,
> > adapter);
> > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = bus->dev_priv;
> > - const unsigned int fw =
> > - intel_uncore_forcewake_for_reg(dev_priv, GMBUS0,
> > - FW_REG_READ | FW_REG_WRITE);
> > int i = 0, inc, try = 0;
> > int ret = 0;
>
> I915_WARN_ON(intel_uncore_forcewake_for_reg(dev_priv, GMBUS0,
> FW_REG_READ |
> FW_REG_WRITE));
>
> ? Would be good to test the fw handling as well.
Not sure I'd want to sprinkle forcewake testing into modeset code.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-12 12:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-12 11:44 [PATCH] drm/i915: GMBUS don't need no forcewake ville.syrjala
2016-10-12 11:58 ` Chris Wilson
2016-10-12 12:39 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2016-10-12 12:51 ` Chris Wilson
2016-10-12 13:49 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for " Patchwork
2016-10-17 14:12 ` Ville Syrjälä
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=20161012123947.GW4329@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=david.weinehall@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox