Re: [PATCH v5 6/6] drm/i915: Use sleeping selftests for igt_atomic on PREEMPT_RT

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] drm/i915: dead data in igt_atomic_phases and truncated commit message
--

commit 321dc694013c1b67cd828bf70f5c9cc0726f1768
Author: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>

drm/i915: Use sleeping selftests for igt_atomic on PREEMPT_RT

This commit updates the i915 igt_atomic selftest to use sleeping test
phases on PREEMPT_RT builds. It adds PREEMPT_RT specific phases and
terminates the test array early.

>     All of the i915 code that used to run in BH's, IRQ's, etc is
>     converted to preemptible code when compiled with PREEMPT_RT,
>     so adding coverage for those situations would require

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but the commit message is visibly truncated mid-sentence
here.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_atomic.c
> index fb506b6990956..8ae39cf570b76 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_atomic.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/igt_atomic.c
[ ... ]
>  const struct igt_atomic_section igt_atomic_phases[] = {
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)
> +	{ "sleeping", __nop, __nop },
> +	{ },
> +#endif
>  	{ "preempt", __preempt_begin, __preempt_end },

[Severity: Low]
Does adding this early null sentinel abandon the remaining elements
("preempt", "softirq", "hardirq") in igt_atomic_phases as unreachable dead
data in the binary on PREEMPT_RT builds?

While this avoids unused function warnings for the callbacks, it leaves
unreachable data in the array. Could the remaining elements be explicitly
guarded with an #else instead?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260923111518.310430-8-dev@lankhorst.se?part=6