From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 7/9] drm/xe/gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt: Call xe_force_wake_put if xe_force_wake_get succeds
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 15:37:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZtoIk-OUD7qkBvKn@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240830052326.3707019-8-himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 10:53:24AM +0530, Himal Prasad Ghimiray wrote:
> A failure in xe_force_wake_get() no longer increments the domain's
> refcount, so xe_force_wake_put() should not be called in such cases
>
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
> index cca9cf536f76..3f86ab704c4f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
> @@ -259,11 +259,11 @@ static int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_guc(struct xe_gt *gt,
> int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> {
> struct xe_device *xe = gt_to_xe(gt);
> + int ret;
>
> if (xe_guc_ct_enabled(>->uc.guc.ct) &&
> gt->uc.guc.submission_state.enabled) {
> struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence fence;
> - int ret;
>
> xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_init(gt, &fence, true);
> ret = xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_guc(gt, &fence);
> @@ -277,7 +277,9 @@ int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> if (IS_SRIOV_VF(xe))
> return 0;
>
> - xe_gt_WARN_ON(gt, xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT));
> + ret = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
> + xe_gt_WARN_ON(gt, ret);
> +
> if (xe->info.platform == XE_PVC || GRAPHICS_VER(xe) >= 20) {
> xe_mmio_write32(gt, PVC_GUC_TLB_INV_DESC1,
> PVC_GUC_TLB_INV_DESC1_INVALIDATE);
> @@ -287,7 +289,8 @@ int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> xe_mmio_write32(gt, GUC_TLB_INV_CR,
> GUC_TLB_INV_CR_INVALIDATE);
> }
> - xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
> + if (!ret)
> + xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
looking all these cases now I honestly prefer the other way around.
If we called the get, we call the put.
get always increase the reference and put does the clean-up.
fw_ref = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), fw_ref);
so, the fw_ref is a mask of the woken up cases which require
the ref drop and sleep call.
> }
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.34.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-05 19:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-30 5:23 [RFC 0/9] Fix xe_force_wake_get() failure handling Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:18 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:18 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:19 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 1/9] drm/xe: Error handling in xe_force_wake_get() Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 6:37 ` Jani Nikula
2024-08-30 6:45 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-05 19:29 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-05 20:02 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-06 16:18 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-10 18:27 ` Nilawar, Badal
2024-09-11 6:51 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-11 6:40 ` Upadhyay, Tejas
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 2/9] drm/xe: Ensure __must_check for xe_force_wake_get() return Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-05 19:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 3/9] drm/xe/gsc: call xe_force_wake_put() only if xe_force_wake_get() succeeds Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 4/9] drm/xe/gt: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 5/9] drm/xe/guc: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 6/9] drm/xe/oa: Handle force_wake_get failure in xe_oa_stream_init() Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 7/9] drm/xe/gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt: Call xe_force_wake_put if xe_force_wake_get succeds Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-05 19:37 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2024-09-05 19:51 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-06 16:29 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-09 9:29 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-10 14:37 ` Nilawar, Badal
2024-09-10 17:39 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-10 17:53 ` Nilawar, Badal
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 8/9] drm/xe: Change return type to void for xe_force_wake_put Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:23 ` [RFC 9/9] drm/xe: forcewake debugfs open fails on xe_forcewake_get failure Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-08-30 5:32 ` ✓ CI.Build: success for Fix xe_force_wake_get() failure handling Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:37 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 5:42 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 6:05 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-08-30 17:41 ` ✓ CI.FULL: " 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=ZtoIk-OUD7qkBvKn@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@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