From: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 3/9] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from guc_ct_send
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 18:56:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230524175701.320653-3-matthew.auld@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230524175701.320653-1-matthew.auld@intel.com>
The callers should already be holding the mem_access reference, before
calling into this.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c | 4 ----
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
index 9dc906f2651a..874323c382b3 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
@@ -605,14 +605,10 @@ static int guc_ct_send(struct xe_guc_ct *ct, const u32 *action, u32 len,
XE_BUG_ON(g2h_len && g2h_fence);
- xe_device_mem_access_get(ct_to_xe(ct));
-
mutex_lock(&ct->lock);
ret = guc_ct_send_locked(ct, action, len, g2h_len, num_g2h, g2h_fence);
mutex_unlock(&ct->lock);
- xe_device_mem_access_put(ct_to_xe(ct));
-
return ret;
}
--
2.40.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-24 17:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-24 17:56 [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 1/9] drm/xe: don't allocate under ct->lock Matthew Auld
2023-05-24 17:56 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 2/9] drm/xe: keep pulling mem_access_get further back Matthew Auld
2023-05-24 17:56 ` Matthew Auld [this message]
2023-05-24 19:33 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 3/9] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from guc_ct_send Rodrigo Vivi
2023-05-24 17:56 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 4/9] drm/xe/ggtt: prime ggtt->lock against FS_RECLAIM Matthew Auld
2023-05-24 17:56 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 5/9] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from invalidation_vma Matthew Auld
2023-05-24 17:56 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 6/9] drm/xe: fix xe_device_mem_access_get() races Matthew Auld
2023-05-24 17:56 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 7/9] drm/xe/vm: tidy up xe_runtime_pm usage Matthew Auld
2023-05-24 19:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-05-24 17:57 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 8/9] drm/xe: add lockdep annotation for xe_device_mem_access_get() Matthew Auld
2023-05-24 17:57 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v10 9/9] drm/xe/debugfs: grab mem_access around forcewake Matthew Auld
2023-05-24 19:32 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-05-24 18:33 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for series starting with [v10,1/9] drm/xe: don't allocate under ct->lock Patchwork
2023-05-24 18:34 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2023-05-24 18:38 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2023-05-24 19:14 ` [Intel-xe] ○ CI.BAT: info " 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=20230524175701.320653-3-matthew.auld@intel.com \
--to=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@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