From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [RFC 02/20] drm/xe: Fix display runtime_pm handling
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:12:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231228021232.2366249-3-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231228021232.2366249-1-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
i915's intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use actually calls the
pm_runtime_get_if_active() with ign_usage_count = false, but Xe
was erroneously calling it with true because of the mem_access cases.
This can lead to unbalanced references.
Let's use directly the 'if_in_use' function provided by linux/pm_runtime.
Also, already start this new function protected from the runtime
recursion, since runtime_pm will need to call for display functions
for a proper D3Cold flow.
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
| 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h
index 5d2a77b52db41..f0464dfc45cf5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h
@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static inline bool intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm)
{
struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device, runtime_pm);
- return xe_pm_runtime_get_if_active(xe);
+ return xe_pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(xe);
}
static inline void intel_runtime_pm_put_unchecked(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
index a7fe69d2f442e..5a4d601ab0976 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
@@ -400,6 +400,23 @@ int xe_pm_runtime_get_if_active(struct xe_device *xe)
return pm_runtime_get_if_active(xe->drm.dev, true);
}
+/**
+ * xe_pm_runtime_get_if_in_use - Get a runtime_pm reference and resume if needed
+ * @xe: xe device instance
+ *
+ * Returns: True if device is awake and the the reference was taken, false otherwise.
+ */
+bool xe_pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(struct xe_device *xe)
+{
+ if (xe_pm_read_callback_task(xe) == current) {
+ /* The device is awake, grab the ref and move on */
+ pm_runtime_get_noresume(xe->drm.dev);
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(xe->drm.dev) >= 0;
+}
+
/**
* xe_pm_assert_unbounded_bridge - Disable PM on unbounded pcie parent bridge
* @xe: xe device instance
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h
index 6b9031f7af243..13eebd604dd96 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ int xe_pm_runtime_resume(struct xe_device *xe);
int xe_pm_runtime_get(struct xe_device *xe);
int xe_pm_runtime_put(struct xe_device *xe);
int xe_pm_runtime_get_if_active(struct xe_device *xe);
+bool xe_pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(struct xe_device *xe);
void xe_pm_assert_unbounded_bridge(struct xe_device *xe);
int xe_pm_set_vram_threshold(struct xe_device *xe, u32 threshold);
void xe_pm_d3cold_allowed_toggle(struct xe_device *xe);
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-28 2:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-28 2:12 [RFC 00/20] First attempt to kill mem_access Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 01/20] drm/xe: Document Xe PM component Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 03/20] drm/xe: Create a xe_pm_runtime_resume_and_get variant for display Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 04/20] drm/xe: Convert xe_pm_runtime_{get, put} to void and protect from recursion Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 05/20] drm/xe: Prepare display for D3Cold Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 06/20] drm/xe: Convert mem_access assertion towards the runtime_pm state Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 11:06 ` Matthew Auld
2024-01-09 17:50 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 07/20] drm/xe: Runtime PM wake on every IOCTL Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-02 11:30 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2024-01-09 17:57 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 08/20] drm/xe: Runtime PM wake on every exec Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 11:24 ` Matthew Auld
2024-01-09 17:41 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 18:40 ` Matthew Auld
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 09/20] drm/xe: Runtime PM wake on every sysfs call Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 10/20] drm/xe: Sort some xe_pm_runtime related functions Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 11:26 ` Matthew Auld
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 11/20] drm/xe: Ensure device is awake before removing it Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 12/20] drm/xe: Remove mem_access from guc_pc calls Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 13/20] drm/xe: Runtime PM wake on every debugfs call Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 14/20] drm/xe: Replace dma_buf mem_access per direct xe_pm_runtime calls Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 15/20] drm/xe: Allow GuC CT fast path and worker regardless of runtime_pm Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 12:09 ` Matthew Auld
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 16/20] drm/xe: Remove mem_access calls from migration Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 12:33 ` Matthew Auld
2024-01-09 17:58 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 18:49 ` Matthew Auld
2024-01-09 22:40 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-11 14:17 ` Matthew Brost
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 17/20] drm/xe: Removing extra mem_access protection from runtime pm Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 18/20] drm/xe: Convert hwmon from mem_access to xe_pm_runtime calls Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 19/20] drm/xe: Remove unused runtime pm helper Rodrigo Vivi
2023-12-28 2:12 ` [RFC 20/20] drm/xe: Mega Kill of mem_access Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 11:41 ` Matthew Auld
2024-01-09 17:39 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-09 18:27 ` Matthew Auld
2024-01-09 22:34 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-04 5:40 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for First attempt to kill mem_access Patchwork
2024-01-04 5:40 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2024-01-04 5:41 ` ✗ CI.KUnit: failure " Patchwork
2024-01-10 5:21 ` [RFC 00/20] " Matthew Brost
2024-01-10 14:06 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-01-10 14:08 ` Vivi, Rodrigo
2024-01-10 14:33 ` Matthew Brost
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=20231228021232.2366249-3-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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