Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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
> 

  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