From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
To: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>
Cc: Intel GFX <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
DRI Devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 4/7] drm/i915/gt: create per-tile sysfs interface
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2022 23:30:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yi5iWtOzyMLFZWo/@intel.intel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yi5J1HB5uypRUIW+@intel.intel>
> > > > > +struct intel_gt *intel_gt_sysfs_get_drvdata(struct device *dev,
> > > > > + const char *name)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct kobject *kobj = &dev->kobj;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > + * We are interested at knowing from where the interface
> > > > > + * has been called, whether it's called from gt/ or from
> > > > > + * the parent directory.
> > > > > + * From the interface position it depends also the value of
> > > > > + * the private data.
> > > > > + * If the interface is called from gt/ then private data is
> > > > > + * of the "struct intel_gt *" type, otherwise it's * a
> > > > > + * "struct drm_i915_private *" type.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > + if (!is_object_gt(kobj)) {
> > > > > + struct drm_i915_private *i915 = kdev_minor_to_i915(dev);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + pr_devel_ratelimited(DEPRECATED
> > > > > + "%s (pid %d) is accessing deprecated %s "
> > > > > + "sysfs control, please use gt/gt<n>/%s instead\n",
> > > > > + current->comm, task_pid_nr(current), name, name);
> > > > > + return to_gt(i915);
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + return kobj_to_gt(kobj);
> > > > It took some time for me to understand what is going on here.
> > > > We have dev argument which sometimes can point to "struct device", sometimes
> > > > to "struct kobj_gt", but it's type suggests differently, quite ugly.
> > > > I wonder if wouldn't be better to use __ATTR instead of DEVICE_ATTR* as in
> > > > case of intel_engines_add_sysfs. This way abstractions would look better,
> > > > hopefully.
> > > How would it help?
> > >
> > > The difference is that I'm adding twice different interfaces with
> > > the same name and different location (i.e. different object). The
> > > legacy intrefaces inherit the object from drm and I'm preserving
> > > that reference.
> > >
> > > While the new objects would derive from the previous and they are
> > > pretty much like intel_engines_add_sysfs().
> >
> > I was not clear on the issue. Here in case of 'id' attribute it is defined
> > as device_attribute, but in kobj_type.sysfs_ops you assign formally
> > incompatible &kobj_sysfs_ops.
>
> 'kobj_sysfs_ops' is of the type 'kobj_type'.
>
> > kobj_sysfs_ops expects kobj_attribute! Fortunately kobj_attribute is 'binary
> > compatible' with device_attribute and kobj is at beginning of struct device
> > as well, so it does not blow up, but I wouldn't say it is clean solution :)
> > If you look at intel_engines_add_sysfs you can see that all attributes are
> > defined as kobj_attribute.
>
> That's exactly the approach I use in the next patches for the
> power management files, I use "struct kobj_gt" wrapped around
> "struct kobject". But I'm using that only for the GT files.
>
> Are you, btw, suggesting to use this same approache also for the
> legacy files that for now have a pointer to the drm kobject? This
> way I would need to add more information, like the pointer to
> i915 and gt_id. This way I wouldn't need the files above that
> look hacky to you. Is this what you mean?
Still this wouldn't solve it because I am merging the legacy
interfaces to an existing kobject and creating new kobjects for
the new interfaces that go under gt. I would need some other
ugly hack to have things coming around.
Unless I misunderstood you.
Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-13 21:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-17 14:41 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 0/7] Introduce multitile support Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 14:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 1/7] drm/i915: Rename INTEL_REGION_LMEM with INTEL_REGION_LMEM_0 Andi Shyti
2022-02-28 19:53 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2022-03-01 15:19 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-02-17 14:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 2/7] drm/i915: Prepare for multiple GTs Andi Shyti
2022-03-01 15:15 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-03-06 19:20 ` Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 14:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 3/7] drm/i915/gt: add gt_is_root() helper Andi Shyti
2022-02-28 20:02 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2022-03-01 15:25 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-03-06 19:23 ` Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 14:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 4/7] drm/i915/gt: create per-tile sysfs interface Andi Shyti
2022-03-02 16:57 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-03-06 23:04 ` Andi Shyti
2022-03-07 20:25 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-03-13 19:45 ` Andi Shyti
2022-03-13 21:30 ` Andi Shyti [this message]
2022-03-14 12:08 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-02-17 14:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 5/7] drm/i915/gt: Create per-tile RC6 " Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 15:34 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-02-17 15:53 ` Andi Shyti
2022-02-18 9:12 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-02-18 9:21 ` Andi Shyti
2022-02-18 10:46 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2022-02-21 17:12 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-02-22 8:57 ` Andi Shyti
2022-11-07 0:08 ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-02-17 20:49 ` kernel test robot
2022-02-17 23:53 ` kernel test robot
2022-03-03 10:19 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-03-13 22:15 ` Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 14:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 6/7] drm/i915/gt: Create per-tile RPS sysfs interfaces Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 19:47 ` kernel test robot
2022-03-03 10:55 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-03-13 23:09 ` Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 14:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 7/7] drm/i915/gt: Adding new sysfs frequency attributes Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 15:45 ` Andi Shyti
2022-02-17 17:06 ` Sundaresan, Sujaritha
2022-02-28 20:37 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2022-03-14 0:38 ` Andi Shyti
2022-03-14 1:32 ` Sundaresan, Sujaritha
2022-03-03 11:17 ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-02-17 23:12 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Introduce multitile support Patchwork
2022-02-17 23:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2022-02-17 23:40 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2022-02-17 23:40 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: warning " 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=Yi5iWtOzyMLFZWo/@intel.intel \
--to=andi.shyti@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andrzej.hajda@intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.auld@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