From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
Casey Bowman <casey.g.bowman@intel.com>
Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
michael.cheng@intel.com
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] i915/drm: Split out x86/arm64 for run_as_guest
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:21:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r16ujni0.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220322020144.thmvicqtlpcmkf6l@ldmartin-desk2>
On Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 04:34:49PM -0700, Casey Bowman wrote:
>>Wanted to ping this older thread to find out where we stand with this patch,
>>Are we OK with the current state of these changes?
>>
>>With more recent information gathered from feedback on other patches, would
>>we prefer changing this to a more arch-neutral control flow?
>>
>>e.g.
>>#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86)
>>...
>>#else
>>...
>>#endif
>>
>>Would we also prefer this RFC series be merged or would it be preferred to
>>create a new series instead?
>
> for this specific function, that is used in only 2 places I think it's
> ok to do:
>
> static inline bool run_as_guest(void)
> {
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86)
> return !hypervisor_is_type(X86_HYPER_NATIVE);
> #else
> /* Not supported yet */
> return false;
> #endif
> }
>
> For PCH it doesn't really matter as we don't execute that function
> for discrete. For intel_vtd_active() I figure anything other than
> x86 would be fine with false here.
>
> Jani, that this look good to you?
It's more important to me to get this out of i915_drv.h, which is not
supposed to be a collection of random stuff anymore. I've sent patches
to this effect but they've stalled a bit.
In general I like the preprocessor control flow outside of functions,
i.e. completely separate function definitions, but for one-line function
implementations I guess this is fine. This is less important for me than
the first point.
BR,
Jani.
>
> Lucas De Marchi
>
>>
>>Regards,
>>Casey
>>
>>On 2/15/22 15:41, Casey Bowman wrote:
>>>Splitting out run_as_guest into platform-specific functions
>>>as arm64 does not support this functionality.
>>>
>>>Signed-off-by: Casey Bowman <casey.g.bowman@intel.com>
>>>---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 8 ++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>
>>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>index 1bca510a946d..fdec2b025540 100644
>>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>@@ -1381,10 +1381,18 @@ IS_SUBPLATFORM(const struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>>> #define INTEL_DISPLAY_ENABLED(dev_priv) \
>>> (drm_WARN_ON(&(dev_priv)->drm, !HAS_DISPLAY(dev_priv)), !(dev_priv)->params.disable_display)
>>>+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86)
>>> static inline bool run_as_guest(void)
>>> {
>>> return !hypervisor_is_type(X86_HYPER_NATIVE);
>>> }
>>>+#elif IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64)
>>>+static inline bool run_as_guest(void)
>>>+{
>>>+ /* Not supported for arm64, so we return false */
>>>+ return false;
>>>+}
>>>+#endif
>>> #define HAS_D12_PLANE_MINIMIZATION(dev_priv) (IS_ROCKETLAKE(dev_priv) || \
>>> IS_ALDERLAKE_S(dev_priv))
>>
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-22 10:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-15 23:41 [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH v3 0/1] Splitting up platform-specific calls Casey Bowman
2022-02-15 23:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] i915/drm: Split out x86/arm64 for run_as_guest Casey Bowman
2022-03-21 23:34 ` Casey Bowman
2022-03-22 2:01 ` Lucas De Marchi
2022-03-22 10:21 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2022-03-22 14:27 ` Lucas De Marchi
2022-03-22 14:49 ` Jani Nikula
2022-03-22 15:18 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-03-22 15:23 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-03-22 15:26 ` Jani Nikula
2022-03-22 15:46 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-03-22 15:52 ` Jani Nikula
2022-03-22 16:50 ` Lucas De Marchi
2022-02-17 2:12 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for Splitting up platform-specific calls (rev3) Patchwork
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=87r16ujni0.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=casey.g.bowman@intel.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=michael.cheng@intel.com \
/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