From: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
To: Zongyao Bai <zongyao.bai@intel.com>, <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
Stuart Summers <stuart.summers@intel.com>,
Shuicheng Lin <shuicheng.lin@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs: Remove sysfs unconditionally while clean sysfs entries
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 16:39:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7cdce3a1-7b03-439d-980c-a47bc542452c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250915214716.1327379-3-zongyao.bai@intel.com>
please use correct subject prefix
On 9/15/2025 11:47 PM, Zongyao Bai wrote:
> xe_device_sysfs_fini() and late_bind_remove_files():
above line could be dropped,
below lines don't need to be indented
> Adjust the remove order of sysfs entries to follow LIFO.
> Remove configuration and status checking,
> call the sysfs removal unconditionally.
>
> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> Cc: Stuart Summers <stuart.summers@intel.com>
> Cc: Shuicheng Lin <shuicheng.lin@intel.com>
> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zongyao Bai <zongyao.bai@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c | 32 ++++++----------------------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c
> index e5e3c56ea53c..693bfda1cfa6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c
> @@ -184,25 +184,8 @@ static int late_bind_create_files(struct device *dev)
>
> static void late_bind_remove_files(struct device *dev)
> {
> - struct xe_device *xe = pdev_to_xe_device(to_pci_dev(dev));
> - struct xe_tile *root = xe_device_get_root_tile(xe);
> - u32 cap = 0;
> - int ret;
> -
> - xe_pm_runtime_get(xe);
> -
> - ret = xe_pcode_read(root, PCODE_MBOX(PCODE_LATE_BINDING, GET_CAPABILITY_STATUS, 0),
> - &cap, NULL);
> - if (ret)
> - goto out;
> -
> - if (REG_FIELD_GET(V1_FAN_SUPPORTED, cap))
> - sysfs_remove_file(&dev->kobj, &dev_attr_lb_fan_control_version.attr);
> -
> - if (REG_FIELD_GET(VR_PARAMS_SUPPORTED, cap))
> - sysfs_remove_file(&dev->kobj, &dev_attr_lb_voltage_regulator_version.attr);
> -out:
> - xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
> + sysfs_remove_file(&dev->kobj, &dev_attr_lb_voltage_regulator_version.attr);
> + sysfs_remove_file(&dev->kobj, &dev_attr_lb_fan_control_version.attr);
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -287,14 +270,11 @@ static const struct attribute *auto_link_downgrade_attrs[] = {
> static void xe_device_sysfs_fini(void *arg)
> {
> struct xe_device *xe = arg;
> + struct device *dev = xe->drm.dev;
if you only need "dev" here then maybe pass it as "arg" instead of "xe" ?
>
> - if (xe->d3cold.capable)
> - sysfs_remove_file(&xe->drm.dev->kobj, &dev_attr_vram_d3cold_threshold.attr);
> -
> - if (xe->info.platform == XE_BATTLEMAGE) {
> - sysfs_remove_files(&xe->drm.dev->kobj, auto_link_downgrade_attrs);
> - late_bind_remove_files(xe->drm.dev);
> - }
> + late_bind_remove_files(dev);
as you remove files unconditionally, does it make sense to keep this helper function?
maybe just move here:
+ sysfs_remove_file(&dev->kobj, &dev_attr_lb_voltage_regulator_version.attr);
+ sysfs_remove_file(&dev->kobj, &dev_attr_lb_fan_control_version.attr);
> + sysfs_remove_files(&dev->kobj, auto_link_downgrade_attrs);
> + sysfs_remove_file(&dev->kobj, &dev_attr_vram_d3cold_threshold.attr);
> }
>
> int xe_device_sysfs_init(struct xe_device *xe)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-16 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-10 18:32 [PATCH] drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs: add cleanup action in xe_device_sysfs_init Zongyao Bai
2025-09-10 18:38 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs: add cleanup action in xe_device_sysfs_init (rev2) Patchwork
2025-09-10 18:39 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-09-10 19:12 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-09-11 2:24 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-09-11 4:11 ` [PATCH] drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs: add cleanup action in xe_device_sysfs_init Lucas De Marchi
2025-09-15 21:47 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs: modify sysfs clean up process Zongyao Bai
2025-09-15 21:47 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs: Add cleanup action in xe_device_sysfs_init Zongyao Bai
2025-09-15 22:34 ` Lin, Shuicheng
2025-09-16 14:29 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-09-16 15:06 ` (subset) " Lucas De Marchi
2025-09-15 21:47 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs: Remove sysfs unconditionally while clean sysfs entries Zongyao Bai
2025-09-15 22:46 ` Lin, Shuicheng
2025-09-16 14:39 ` Michal Wajdeczko [this message]
2025-09-16 15:03 ` Lucas De Marchi
2025-09-15 21:55 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs: add cleanup action in xe_device_sysfs_init (rev3) Patchwork
2025-09-15 21:56 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-09-15 22:34 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-09-16 3:29 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " 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=7cdce3a1-7b03-439d-980c-a47bc542452c@intel.com \
--to=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=shuicheng.lin@intel.com \
--cc=stuart.summers@intel.com \
--cc=zongyao.bai@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