* [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
@ 2017-10-10 11:48 Mika Kuoppala
2017-10-10 12:09 ` Chris Wilson
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mika Kuoppala @ 2017-10-10 11:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx
There is function to tell how many ports we have, so use it.
We still have direct relationship with array size and port count,
so no harm was done.
Fixes: 76e70087d360 ("drm/i915: Make execlist port count variable")
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
index 31381a327347..f15de4dcefde 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
@@ -500,7 +500,7 @@ static void i915_guc_submit(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
const unsigned int engine_id = engine->id;
unsigned int n;
- for (n = 0; n < ARRAY_SIZE(execlists->port); n++) {
+ for (n = 0; n < execlists_num_ports(execlists); n++) {
struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq;
unsigned int count;
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index 721432ddf403..fbfcf88d7fe3 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -691,7 +691,7 @@ static void
execlist_cancel_port_requests(struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists)
{
struct execlist_port *port = execlists->port;
- unsigned int num_ports = ARRAY_SIZE(execlists->port);
+ unsigned int num_ports = execlists_num_ports(execlists);
while (num_ports-- && port_isset(port)) {
struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq = port_request(port);
--
2.11.0
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
2017-10-10 11:48 [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array Mika Kuoppala
@ 2017-10-10 12:09 ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-10 12:27 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2017-10-10 12:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mika Kuoppala, intel-gfx
Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2017-10-10 12:48:57)
> There is function to tell how many ports we have, so use it.
> We still have direct relationship with array size and port count,
> so no harm was done.
>
> Fixes: 76e70087d360 ("drm/i915: Make execlist port count variable")
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
I had a sweepstake on how long that ARRAY_SIZE would last.
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
2017-10-10 11:48 [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array Mika Kuoppala
2017-10-10 12:09 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2017-10-10 12:27 ` Patchwork
2017-10-10 12:59 ` [PATCH] " Joonas Lahtinen
2017-10-10 15:58 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for " Patchwork
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2017-10-10 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mika Kuoppala; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/31647/
State : success
== Summary ==
Series 31647v1 drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/31647/revisions/1/mbox/
fi-bdw-5557u total:289 pass:268 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:21 time:447s
fi-bdw-gvtdvm total:289 pass:265 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:24 time:473s
fi-blb-e6850 total:289 pass:223 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:65 time:390s
fi-bsw-n3050 total:289 pass:243 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:46 time:572s
fi-bwr-2160 total:289 pass:183 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:106 time:288s
fi-bxt-dsi total:289 pass:259 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:30 time:523s
fi-bxt-j4205 total:289 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:29 time:520s
fi-byt-j1900 total:289 pass:253 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:35 time:540s
fi-byt-n2820 total:289 pass:250 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:39 time:518s
fi-cfl-s total:289 pass:256 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:32 time:560s
fi-cnl-y total:289 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time:633s
fi-elk-e7500 total:289 pass:229 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:60 time:433s
fi-glk-1 total:289 pass:261 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:28 time:602s
fi-hsw-4770 total:289 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time:433s
fi-hsw-4770r total:289 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time:419s
fi-ilk-650 total:289 pass:228 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:61 time:466s
fi-ivb-3520m total:289 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:29 time:508s
fi-ivb-3770 total:289 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:29 time:481s
fi-kbl-7500u total:289 pass:264 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:24 time:510s
fi-kbl-7560u total:289 pass:270 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:19 time:580s
fi-kbl-7567u total:289 pass:265 dwarn:4 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20 time:491s
fi-kbl-r total:289 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time:587s
fi-pnv-d510 total:289 pass:222 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:66 time:666s
fi-skl-6260u total:289 pass:269 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20 time:472s
fi-skl-6700hq total:289 pass:263 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:26 time:661s
fi-skl-6700k total:289 pass:265 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:24 time:537s
fi-skl-6770hq total:289 pass:269 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20 time:517s
fi-skl-gvtdvm total:289 pass:266 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:23 time:474s
fi-snb-2520m total:289 pass:250 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:39 time:588s
fi-snb-2600 total:289 pass:249 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:40 time:437s
6bcaf2275e52e258c737bc355e73072640be5ac3 drm-tip: 2017y-10m-10d-10h-57m-51s UTC integration manifest
3ff26db5d744 drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
== Logs ==
For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_5970/
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
2017-10-10 11:48 [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array Mika Kuoppala
2017-10-10 12:09 ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-10 12:27 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
@ 2017-10-10 12:59 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2017-10-10 13:42 ` Mika Kuoppala
2017-10-10 15:58 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for " Patchwork
3 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joonas Lahtinen @ 2017-10-10 12:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mika Kuoppala, intel-gfx
On Tue, 2017-10-10 at 14:48 +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
> There is function to tell how many ports we have, so use it.
> We still have direct relationship with array size and port count,
> so no harm was done.
>
> Fixes: 76e70087d360 ("drm/i915: Make execlist port count variable")
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
<SNIP>
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
> @@ -500,7 +500,7 @@ static void i915_guc_submit(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> const unsigned int engine_id = engine->id;
> unsigned int n;
>
> - for (n = 0; n < ARRAY_SIZE(execlists->port); n++) {
> + for (n = 0; n < execlists_num_ports(execlists); n++) {
For a while I was looking this delta in reverse and could not figure it
out.
Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Regards, Joonas
--
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
2017-10-10 12:59 ` [PATCH] " Joonas Lahtinen
@ 2017-10-10 13:42 ` Mika Kuoppala
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mika Kuoppala @ 2017-10-10 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joonas Lahtinen, intel-gfx
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2017-10-10 at 14:48 +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
>> There is function to tell how many ports we have, so use it.
>> We still have direct relationship with array size and port count,
>> so no harm was done.
>>
>> Fixes: 76e70087d360 ("drm/i915: Make execlist port count variable")
>> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
>
> <SNIP>
>
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
>> @@ -500,7 +500,7 @@ static void i915_guc_submit(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
>> const unsigned int engine_id = engine->id;
>> unsigned int n;
>>
>> - for (n = 0; n < ARRAY_SIZE(execlists->port); n++) {
>> + for (n = 0; n < execlists_num_ports(execlists); n++) {
>
> For a while I was looking this delta in reverse and could not figure it
> out.
>
> Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
>
I think I messed atleast on one of these missing on the countless
rebases.
Thanks for reviews. Pushed.
-Mika
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
2017-10-10 11:48 [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array Mika Kuoppala
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2017-10-10 12:59 ` [PATCH] " Joonas Lahtinen
@ 2017-10-10 15:58 ` Patchwork
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2017-10-10 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mika Kuoppala; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/31647/
State : failure
== Summary ==
Test perf:
Subgroup polling:
pass -> FAIL (shard-hsw) fdo#102252
Test kms_flip:
Subgroup modeset-vs-vblank-race-interruptible:
pass -> FAIL (shard-hsw)
fdo#102252 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102252
shard-hsw total:2552 pass:1428 dwarn:6 dfail:0 fail:15 skip:1103 time:9651s
== Logs ==
For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_5970/shards.html
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-10-10 15:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-10-10 11:48 [PATCH] drm/i915: Use execlists_num_ports instead of size of array Mika Kuoppala
2017-10-10 12:09 ` Chris Wilson
2017-10-10 12:27 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2017-10-10 12:59 ` [PATCH] " Joonas Lahtinen
2017-10-10 13:42 ` Mika Kuoppala
2017-10-10 15:58 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for " Patchwork
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox