From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>,
Tejas Upadhyay <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Always check force_wake_get return code
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 10:31:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h6hasfbj.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240312194256.965685-1-daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gsc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gsc.c
> index d9aa815a5bc2..902c52d95a8a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gsc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gsc.c
> @@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ static void gsc_work(struct work_struct *work)
> spin_unlock_irq(&gsc->lock);
>
> xe_pm_runtime_get(xe);
> - xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GSC);
> + XE_WARN_ON(xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GSC));
Up to the xe maintainers to decide, but I'm really not a fan of hiding
functionality inside warn ons. My approach usually is, would it work if
all the warns were removed? If yes, it's good. If not, maybe reconsider.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-13 8:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-12 19:42 [PATCH] drm/xe: Always check force_wake_get return code Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-03-12 19:47 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-03-12 19:47 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-03-12 19:48 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-03-12 19:59 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-03-12 20:02 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-03-12 20:03 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-03-12 20:22 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-03-12 23:07 ` [PATCH] " Matt Roper
2024-03-13 8:31 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2024-03-13 14:24 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-03-13 14:56 ` Jani Nikula
2024-03-13 17:35 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-03-14 10:58 ` Upadhyay, Tejas
2024-03-14 13:53 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-03-14 14:12 ` Upadhyay, Tejas
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-06-03 11:30 Tejas Upadhyay
2024-06-03 18:56 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-06-03 19:39 ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-06-04 18:31 ` Rodrigo Vivi
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=87h6hasfbj.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=tejas.upadhyay@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