From: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
To: "Gupta, Anshuman" <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>,
"intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org" <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 08/13] drm/xe/display: use mem_access underneath
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:19:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a74688e3-9e3c-4ff6-1d2c-60012ae50bbc@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CY5PR11MB621160E01D9FCB9B91E365149524A@CY5PR11MB6211.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 28/06/2023 10:51, Gupta, Anshuman wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Intel-xe <intel-xe-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of
>> Matthew Auld
>> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 4:21 PM
>> To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Subject: [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 08/13] drm/xe/display: use mem_access
>> underneath
>>
>> There are places in the display code (i915) doing mmio access.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h | 5 +++--
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h
>> index 59bf1d4a61d6..7a43f3af1796 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h
>> @@ -151,6 +151,7 @@ static inline bool intel_runtime_pm_get(struct
>> xe_runtime_pm *pm)
>> xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
>> return false;
>> }
>> + xe_device_mem_access_get(xe);
>> return true;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -158,14 +159,14 @@ static inline bool
>> intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm) {
>> struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device,
>> runtime_pm);
>>
>> - return xe_pm_runtime_get_if_active(xe);
>> + return xe_device_mem_access_get_if_ongoing(xe);
>> }
>>
>> static inline void intel_runtime_pm_put_unchecked(struct xe_runtime_pm
>> *pm) {
>> struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device,
>> runtime_pm);
>>
>> - xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
>> + xe_device_mem_access_put(xe);
> This patch does not remove xe_pm_runtime_get() from intel_runtime_pm_get() but removes
> xe_pm_runtime_put() here. It will be unbalanced dev usage_count.
Indeed. Thanks for catching.
> Thanks,
> Anshuman Gupta.
>> }
>>
>> static inline void intel_runtime_pm_put(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm, bool
>> wakeref)
>> --
>> 2.41.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-29 9:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-26 10:50 [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 00/13] xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 01/13] drm/xe: fix xe_device_mem_access_get() races Matthew Auld
2023-06-30 15:22 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-07-04 11:25 ` Matthew Auld
2023-07-04 15:29 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-07-04 16:00 ` Matthew Auld
2023-07-11 9:00 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-07-11 11:06 ` Matthew Auld
2023-07-11 17:56 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 02/13] drm/xe/vm: tidy up xe_runtime_pm usage Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 03/13] drm/xe/debugfs: grab mem_access around forcewake Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 04/13] drm/xe/guc_pc: add missing mem_access for freq_rpe_show Matthew Auld
2023-06-27 6:53 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-06-27 8:20 ` Matthew Auld
2023-06-27 10:14 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 05/13] drm/xe/mmio: grab mem_access in xe_mmio_ioctl Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 06/13] drm/xe: ensure correct access_put ordering Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 07/13] drm/xe/pci: wrap probe with mem_access Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 08/13] drm/xe/display: use mem_access underneath Matthew Auld
2023-06-28 9:51 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-06-29 9:19 ` Matthew Auld [this message]
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 09/13] drm/xe/mmio: enforce xe_device_assert_mem_access Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 10/13] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from guc_ct_send Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 11/13] drm/xe/ggtt: prime ggtt->lock against FS_RECLAIM Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 12/13] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from invalidation_vma Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 13/13] drm/xe: add lockdep annotation for xe_device_mem_access_get() Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 12:55 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits (rev2) Patchwork
2023-06-26 12:56 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2023-06-26 12:57 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2023-06-26 13:01 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2023-06-26 13:01 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2023-06-26 13:02 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2023-06-26 13:46 ` [Intel-xe] ○ CI.BAT: info " Patchwork
2023-06-30 6:21 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 00/13] xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits Dixit, Ashutosh
2023-06-30 11:07 ` Matthew Auld
2023-06-30 16:59 ` Dixit, Ashutosh
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=a74688e3-9e3c-4ff6-1d2c-60012ae50bbc@intel.com \
--to=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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