Re: [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Parallel submission aka multi-bb execbuf (rev4)

John Harrison
2021-10-13T19:24:15Z

On 10/12/2021 17:15, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 03:15:00PM -0700, John Harrison wrote:
>> On 10/4/2021 15:21, Patchwork wrote:
>>> == Series Details ==
>>>
>>> Series: Parallel submission aka multi-bb execbuf (rev4)
>>> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/92789/
>>> State : warning
>>>
>>> == Summary ==
>>>
>>> $ dim checkpatch origin/drm-tip
>>> e2a47a99bf9d drm/i915/guc: Move GuC guc_id allocation under submission state sub-struct
>>> f83d8f1539fa drm/i915/guc: Take GT PM ref when deregistering context
>>> -:79: CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse 'gt' - possible side-effects?
>>> #79: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_pm.h:44:
>>> +#define with_intel_gt_pm(gt, tmp) \
>>> + for (tmp = 1, intel_gt_pm_get(gt); tmp; \
>>> + intel_gt_pm_put(gt), tmp = 0)
>>>
>>> -:79: CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse 'tmp' - possible side-effects?
>>> #79: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_pm.h:44:
>>> +#define with_intel_gt_pm(gt, tmp) \
>>> + for (tmp = 1, intel_gt_pm_get(gt); tmp; \
>>> + intel_gt_pm_put(gt), tmp = 0)
>> Not sure what these two are complaining about? But 'gt' and 'tmp' should be
>> wrapped with parentheses when used?
>>
> Not, sure but I think this one is fine.
>
>>> total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 290 lines checked
>>> 93e5284929b3 drm/i915/guc: Take engine PM when a context is pinned with GuC submission
>>> 4dd6554d994d drm/i915/guc: Don't call switch_to_kernel_context with GuC submission
>>> 8629b55f536c drm/i915: Add logical engine mapping
>>> 8117ec0a1ca7 drm/i915: Expose logical engine instance to user
>>> aa8e1eb4dd4e drm/i915/guc: Introduce context parent-child relationship
>>> aaf50eacc2fd drm/i915/guc: Add multi-lrc context registration
>>> e5f6f50e66d1 drm/i915/guc: Ensure GuC schedule operations do not operate on child contexts
>>> adf21ba138f3 drm/i915/guc: Assign contexts in parent-child relationship consecutive guc_ids
>>> 40ef33318b81 drm/i915/guc: Implement parallel context pin / unpin functions
>>> 1ad560c70346 drm/i915/guc: Implement multi-lrc submission
>>> -:364: CHECK:SPACING: spaces preferred around that '*' (ctx:ExV)
>>> #364: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c:771:
>>> + *wqi++ = child->ring->tail / sizeof(u64);
>>> ^
>> This seems like a bogus warning.
>>
> Agree.
>
>>> total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 1 checks, 570 lines checked
>>> 466c01457dec drm/i915/guc: Insert submit fences between requests in parent-child relationship
>>> 2ece815c1f18 drm/i915/guc: Implement multi-lrc reset
>>> 7add5784199f drm/i915/guc: Update debugfs for GuC multi-lrc
>>> -:23: CHECK:LINE_SPACING: Please don't use multiple blank lines
>>> #23: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c:3707:
>>> +
>> This should be fixed.
>>
> Done.
>
>>> total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 1 checks, 67 lines checked
>>> 966991d7bbed drm/i915: Fix bug in user proto-context creation that leaked contexts
>>> 0eb3d3bf0c84 drm/i915/guc: Connect UAPI to GuC multi-lrc interface
>>> 68c6596b649a drm/i915/doc: Update parallel submit doc to point to i915_drm.h
>>> -:13: WARNING:FILE_PATH_CHANGES: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?
>>> #13:
>>> deleted file mode 100644
>>>
>>> total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 checks, 10 lines checked
>>> 8290f5d15ca2 drm/i915/guc: Add basic GuC multi-lrc selftest
>>> -:22: WARNING:FILE_PATH_CHANGES: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?
>>> #22:
>>> new file mode 100644
>> These two can be ignored.
> Agree.
>
>>> total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 checks, 190 lines checked
>>> ade3768c42d5 drm/i915/guc: Implement no mid batch preemption for multi-lrc
>>> 57882939d788 drm/i915: Multi-BB execbuf
>>> -:369: CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse '_i' - possible side-effects?
>>> #369: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c:1854:
>>> +#define for_each_batch_create_order(_eb, _i) \
>>> + for (_i = 0; _i < (_eb)->num_batches; ++_i)
>> Again, not sure the 'reuse' comment means but should also use '(_i)'?
>>
> I haven't been able to figure out how to fix these ones. I think you
> only need () if you dref the variable.
The () is to prevent any kind of operator precedence confusion when
passing in something more exciting than a simple variable. Doesn't have
to be a deref, it could be any operator. Granted, extremely unlikely for
this particular macro but generally good practice just in case. E.g.
someone passes in weird things like 'a, func()' as '_i'.

John.

>
>>> -:371: ERROR:MULTISTATEMENT_MACRO_USE_DO_WHILE: Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while loop
>>> #371: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c:1856:
>>> +#define for_each_batch_add_order(_eb, _i) \
>>> + BUILD_BUG_ON(!typecheck(int, _i)); \
>>> + for (_i = (_eb)->num_batches - 1; _i >= 0; --_i)
>> This seems bogus. Wrapping it in a do/while will break the purpose!
>>
> Right. Added the BUILD_BUG_ON here because I did have a bug where I used
> an unsigned with this macro and that breaks the macro.
>
> Matt
>
>>> -:371: CHECK:MACRO_ARG_REUSE: Macro argument reuse '_i' - possible side-effects?
>>> #371: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c:1856:
>>> +#define for_each_batch_add_order(_eb, _i) \
>>> + BUILD_BUG_ON(!typecheck(int, _i)); \
>>> + for (_i = (_eb)->num_batches - 1; _i >= 0; --_i)
>> As above.
>>
>>> total: 1 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 1298 lines checked
>>> 28b699ece289 drm/i915/guc: Handle errors in multi-lrc requests
>>> 962e6b3dce59 drm/i915: Make request conflict tracking understand parallel submits
>>> 368ab12f5205 drm/i915: Update I915_GEM_BUSY IOCTL to understand composite fences
>>> b52570f01859 drm/i915: Enable multi-bb execbuf
>>> 8766155832d7 drm/i915/execlists: Weak parallel submission support for execlists
>>>
>>>