From: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe/pm: Also avoid missing outer rpm warning on system suspend
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 16:33:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z2LdJSyhpJoSNQ-Q@ideak-desk.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241217230547.1667561-1-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 06:05:47PM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> We have some cases where display is releasing power domains at
> release_async_put_domains() where intel_runtime_pm_get_noresume()
> is called, but no outer protection. In Xe this will trigger our
> traditional warning.
I suppose by outer protection you mean an RPM reference that is
guaranteed to be held at the point (that is right before)
release_async_put_domains() calls intel_runtime_pm_get_noresume(). This
is guaranteed, i.e. such an RPM reference is held by definition (by the
power domain reference that is being put).
Instead, the actual reason for triggering the warn - IIUC - is that
intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use() called from
xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume() (probably for the exact reason to check if
an outer RPM is held) fails if it is called while system suspending /
resuming. This is the same scenario as when
intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use() would fail if called during runtime
suspending / resuming and - worked around earlier I assume - by
suppressing the warning in this case using xe_pm_suspending_or_resuming().
So in this fix the above workaround to suppress the warning is just
extended to the system suspend/resume case.
> However, this case should be safe because it is triggered from the
> system suspend path, where we certainly won't be transitioning to rpm
> suspend.
>
> This wouldn't happen if the display pm sequences, including
> all irq flow was in sync between i915 and xe. So, while we
> don't get there, let's not raise warnings when we are in this
> system suspend path.
I think the issue fixed in this patch is just a consequence of how the
outer RPM check works using xe_pm_suspending_or_resuming() and wouldn't
change even after the IRQ related issues are fixed.
> Suggested-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
With the above understanding:
Reviewed-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> index a6761cb769b2..c6e57af0144c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>
> #include <linux/fault-inject.h>
> #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> +#include <linux/suspend.h>
>
> #include <drm/drm_managed.h>
> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
> @@ -607,7 +608,8 @@ static bool xe_pm_suspending_or_resuming(struct xe_device *xe)
> struct device *dev = xe->drm.dev;
>
> return dev->power.runtime_status == RPM_SUSPENDING ||
> - dev->power.runtime_status == RPM_RESUMING;
> + dev->power.runtime_status == RPM_RESUMING ||
> + pm_suspend_target_state != PM_SUSPEND_ON;
> #else
> return false;
> #endif
> --
> 2.47.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-18 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-17 23:05 [PATCH] drm/xe/pm: Also avoid missing outer rpm warning on system suspend Rodrigo Vivi
2024-12-18 3:05 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-12-18 3:05 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-12-18 3:07 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-12-18 3:25 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-12-18 3:27 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-12-18 3:29 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-12-18 4:03 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-12-18 13:43 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2024-12-18 14:33 ` Imre Deak [this message]
2024-12-20 14:55 ` [PATCH] " Rodrigo Vivi
2024-12-20 16:20 ` Imre Deak
2024-12-20 18:34 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-12-20 19:15 ` Imre Deak
2024-12-20 19:21 ` 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=Z2LdJSyhpJoSNQ-Q@ideak-desk.fi.intel.com \
--to=imre.deak@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