Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>
To: <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>, <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Krzysztof Karas <krzysztof.karas@intel.com>,
	Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
	Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/dmc_wl: Do not check for DMC payload
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 11:18:56 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <173876513622.111435.12477179871767663924@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250124191250.56833-1-gustavo.sousa@intel.com>

Quoting Gustavo Sousa (2025-01-24 16:12:34-03:00)
>Enabling and disabling of DMC wakelock is already coupled with enabling
>and disabling of dynamic DC states, which already depend on the DMC
>being properly loaded. As such, we do not need to check if we already
>have a DMC payload parsed in __intel_dmc_wl_supported().
>
>Furthermore, the presence of such a check causes inconsistencies in the
>refcount if the following sequence of events happen:
>
>  1. A call to one of the register accessors from intel_de.h is done
>     before the DMC payload is parsed. That causes intel_dmc_wl_get() to
>     be called. Suppose the register offset qualifies as needing the
>     wakelock.
>
>     In normal circumstances, the refcount would be incremented, but,
>     because __intel_dmc_wl_supported() returns false, the refcount is
>     untouched.
>
>  2. In a separate worker thread, the DMC firmware is parsed. Parsing of
>     the DMC payload is finished before the corresponding
>     intel_dmc_wl_put() from (1) is called.
>
>  3. When in the context of (1), intel_dmc_wl_put() gets called, now we
>     have __intel_dmc_wl_supported() returning true and we hit the
>     warning, because the code doesn't expect a zero refcount.
>
>Let's remove that check, since it is unnecessary and causes the
>inconsistency illustrated above.
>
>Signed-off-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>

Pushed to drm-intel-next. Thank you all for the reviews/feedback!

--
Gustavo Sousa

>---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc_wl.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc_wl.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc_wl.c
>index 43884740f8ea..9be6ad11ff5d 100644
>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc_wl.c
>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc_wl.c
>@@ -10,7 +10,6 @@
> #include "i915_drv.h"
> #include "i915_reg.h"
> #include "intel_de.h"
>-#include "intel_dmc.h"
> #include "intel_dmc_regs.h"
> #include "intel_dmc_wl.h"
> 
>@@ -282,7 +281,7 @@ static bool intel_dmc_wl_check_range(struct intel_display *display,
> 
> static bool __intel_dmc_wl_supported(struct intel_display *display)
> {
>-        return display->params.enable_dmc_wl && intel_dmc_has_payload(display);
>+        return display->params.enable_dmc_wl;
> }
> 
> static void intel_dmc_wl_sanitize_param(struct intel_display *display)
>-- 
>2.48.1
>

      parent reply	other threads:[~2025-02-05 14:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-01-24 19:12 [PATCH] drm/i915/dmc_wl: Do not check for DMC payload Gustavo Sousa
2025-01-24 21:36 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2025-01-24 21:36 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2025-01-24 21:37 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2025-01-24 21:54 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2025-01-24 21:57 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2025-01-24 22:00 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2025-01-24 22:34 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-01-25  4:42 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-02-05 11:57   ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-01-30  9:41 ` [PATCH] " Luca Coelho
2025-01-30 14:18 ` Krzysztof Karas
2025-01-31 20:16   ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-01-31 23:49     ` Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-03 11:44       ` Gustavo Sousa
2025-02-05  9:07         ` Krzysztof Karas
2025-02-05 14:18 ` Gustavo Sousa [this message]

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=173876513622.111435.12477179871767663924@intel.com \
    --to=gustavo.sousa@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=krzysztof.karas@intel.com \
    --cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
    --cc=luciano.coelho@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