Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
	"Michal Wajdeczko" <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>,
	intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
	"Lucas De Marchi" <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] FW guard class
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 18:06:20 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZnB7HJ3qKSCpyNwR@DUT025-TGLU.fm.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZnB51-d3XtwUfPfT@intel.com>

On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 02:00:55PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 05:24:24PM +0000, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 04:34:27PM +0200, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
> > > There is support for 'classes' with constructor and destructor
> > > semantics that can be used for any scope-based resource management,
> > > like device force-wake management.
> > > 
> > > Add necessary definitions explicitly, since existing macros from
> > > linux/cleanup.h can't deal with our specific requirements yet.
> > > 
> > > This should allow us to use:
> > > 
> > > 	scoped_guard(xe_fw, fw, XE_FW_GT)
> > > 		foo();
> > > or
> > > 	CLASS(xe_fw, var)(fw, XE_FW_GT);
> > > 
> > > without any concern of leaking the force-wake references.
> > > 
> > > Note: this is preliminary code as right now it's unclear how to
> > > correctly handle errors from the force-wake functions.
> > > 
> > 
> > I'm personally don't like this at all. IMO it obfuscate the code with
> > little real benefit. This is just an opinion though, others opinions may
> > differ from mine.
> 
> Well, on the positive side, it is not adding a driver only thing like
> i915's with_runtime_pm() macro.
> 
> But I'm also not sure if I like the overall idea anyway:
> 
> - I don't like adding C++isms in a pure C code. Specially something not
> so standard and common that will decrease the ramp-up time for newcomers.
> - It looks like and extra overhead on the object creation destruction.
> - It looks not flexible for handling different cases... like forcewake for
> instance where we might want to ignore the ack timeout in some cases.

Thanks for writing this out. I agree 100% on all your points.

Matt

> 
> > 
> > Matt
> > 
> > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Michal Wajdeczko (3):
> > >   drm/xe: Introduce force-wake guard class
> > >   drm/xe: Use new FW guard in xe_mocs.c
> > >   drm/xe: Use new FW guard in xe_pat.c
> > > 
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h       | 48 +++++++++++++++++++
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake_types.h | 12 +++++
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_mocs.c             | 12 +----
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pat.c              | 60 ++++++++----------------
> > >  4 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > 2.43.0
> > > 

  reply	other threads:[~2024-06-17 18:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-17 14:34 [RFC 0/3] FW guard class Michal Wajdeczko
2024-06-17 14:34 ` [RFC 1/3] drm/xe: Introduce force-wake " Michal Wajdeczko
2024-06-17 14:34 ` [RFC 2/3] drm/xe: Use new FW guard in xe_mocs.c Michal Wajdeczko
2024-06-17 14:34 ` [RFC 3/3] drm/xe: Use new FW guard in xe_pat.c Michal Wajdeczko
2024-06-17 14:59 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for FW guard class Patchwork
2024-06-17 15:00 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2024-06-17 15:01 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2024-06-17 15:13 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-06-17 15:15 ` ✗ CI.Hooks: failure " Patchwork
2024-06-17 15:16 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: success " Patchwork
2024-06-17 15:38 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-06-17 17:24 ` [RFC 0/3] " Matthew Brost
2024-06-17 18:00   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-06-17 18:06     ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2024-06-17 19:24     ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-06-17 23:30       ` Matthew Brost
2024-06-18  0:54         ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-06-18  1:16           ` Matthew Brost
2024-06-18 18:08             ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-06-18 18:44               ` Matthew Brost
2024-06-18 20:26           ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-06-19  6:40             ` Thomas Hellström
2024-06-19 18:46               ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-06-24 16:32             ` Nirmoy Das
2024-06-18  6:39 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure for " 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=ZnB7HJ3qKSCpyNwR@DUT025-TGLU.fm.intel.com \
    --to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
    --cc=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.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