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
> > >
next prev parent 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