Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] drm/xe/guc: Make xe_guc_submit_pause() available for non-VF cases

[Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 11:09:19AM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 01:00:35PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > Drop xe_gt_assert() meant for VF migration and make xe_guc_submit_pause()
> > available for non-VF cases.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c | 2 --
> >  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> > index 0ef67d3523a7..3cc428d45b4a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> > @@ -2170,8 +2170,6 @@ void xe_guc_submit_pause(struct xe_guc *guc)
> >  	struct xe_exec_queue *q;
> >  	unsigned long index;
> >  
> > -	xe_gt_assert(guc_to_gt(guc), vf_recovery(guc));
> > -
> 
> This function does a lot of things specific to VF recovery, it should
> not be called in runtime PM flows. Same goes for xe_guc_submit_unpause.

Can we branch them out inside pause/unpause()? Or is there a better
alternative?

Considering we'd still like to achieve the original pause/unpause()
behaviour here (stop/start submission on a scheduler without loosing
GuC state), do you suspect any side-effects?

Raag

> >  	mutex_lock(&guc->submission_state.lock);
> >  	xa_for_each(&guc->submission_state.exec_queue_lookup, index, q) {
> >  		/* Prevent redundant attempts to stop parallel queues */
> > -- 
> > 2.34.1
> >