From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75BB2C4345F for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 14:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39ABE11A4CE; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 14:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="XHvqGiH4"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.9]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76B3A11A4CC; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 14:39:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1714055967; x=1745591967; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qGRpt6bZDCsTz1PWX7f/9ZZ8kRWoiqHM7jRTfpecQw8=; b=XHvqGiH4P9lkaLT9j6BEeR97goj+bSKEV/yAy/D/ysz7dY7DqugMZJg5 DpEWqTwrJ3K0OkCzgEp51nle93hIHR9BWQZPJ/AYUhGwCj+vGQTHDtAHz V1gRn5ElyhmLfJiTMp/ag6lzvnvItExEsO7BxNUjwTLztgHNV2KWkpd0t IFhLxBYHZQN2lOiBy8fLM9/PDHOBF6mdskyFSNpSD5i/DwEcuI4jmpOW6 ajceo9fRmNDcvFM40AEOY6LkF7lNmgqzWODntN5zF+S7lLUKLWt8l3JiM h8qgisWp08jY351AY1vXlVjm53ZzTerejjnFZwbJNX95H2b+flrZAyU26 A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: rHlRuvnETDqfTNv8qGzveg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 0eGnzqPTTpWuskcSAFUYyg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11055"; a="20436523" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,229,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="20436523" Received: from orviesa005.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.145]) by fmvoesa103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Apr 2024 07:39:26 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 4ojWzRI2S7OIyZ2bon94wA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: XYNWXsRBRHCSY8ETRTM1BA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,229,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="29871168" Received: from aravind-dev.iind.intel.com (HELO [10.145.162.146]) ([10.145.162.146]) by orviesa005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Apr 2024 07:39:24 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 20:12:14 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] drm: add devm release action Content-Language: en-US To: Maxime Ripard , Rodrigo Vivi Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, daniel@ffwll.ch, maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com, airlied@gmail.com, tzimmermann@suse.de, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, Thomas Hellstr_m References: <20240422065756.294679-1-aravind.iddamsetty@linux.intel.com> <20240422065756.294679-2-aravind.iddamsetty@linux.intel.com> <20240424-spectacular-lumpy-guan-7188eb@houat> <20240425-diligent-literate-terrier-2e787d@penduick> From: Aravind Iddamsetty In-Reply-To: <20240425-diligent-literate-terrier-2e787d@penduick> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel Xe graphics driver List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-xe-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-xe" On 25/04/24 18:22, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 08:20:32AM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 01:49:16PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 01:42:22PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 02:25:06PM +0530, Aravind Iddamsetty wrote: >>>>> On 23/04/24 02:24, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 12:27:53PM +0530, Aravind Iddamsetty wrote: >>>>>>> In scenarios where drm_dev_put is directly called by driver we want to >>>>>>> release devm_drm_dev_init_release action associated with struct >>>>>>> drm_device. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> v2: Directly expose the original function, instead of introducing a >>>>>>> helper (Rodrigo) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> v3: add kernel-doc (Maxime Ripard) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cc: Maxime Ripard >>>>>>> Cc: Thomas Hellstr_m >>>>>>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi >>>>>>> >>>>>> please avoid these empty lines here.... cc, rv-b, sign-offs, links, >>>>>> etc are all in the same block. >>>>> ok. >>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Aravind Iddamsetty >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c | 13 +++++++++++++ >>>>>>> include/drm/drm_drv.h | 2 ++ >>>>>>> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c >>>>>>> index 243cacb3575c..9d0409165f1e 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c >>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c >>>>>>> @@ -714,6 +714,19 @@ static int devm_drm_dev_init(struct device *parent, >>>>>>> devm_drm_dev_init_release, dev); >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +/** >>>>>>> + * devm_drm_dev_release_action - Call the final release action of the device >>>>>> Seeing the doc here gave me a second thought.... >>>>>> >>>>>> the original release should be renamed to _devm_drm_dev_release >>>>>> and this should be called devm_drm_dev_release without the 'action' word. >>>>> i believe, was suggested earlier to directly expose the main function, is  >>>>> there any reason to have a __ version ? >>>> No no, just ignore me. Just remove the '_action' and don't change the other. >>>> >>>> I don't like exposing the a function with '__'. what would '__' that mean? >>>> This is what I meant on the first comment. >>>> >>>> Now, I believe that we don't need the '_action'. What does the 'action' mean? >>>> >>>> the devm_drm_dev_release should be enough. But then I got confused and >>>> I thought it would conflict with the original released function name. >>>> But I misread it. >>> I don't think devm_drm_dev_release is a good name either. Just like any >>> other devm_* function that cancels what a previous one has been doing >>> (devm_kfree, devm_backlight_device_unregister, devm_nvmem_device_put, >>> etc.) it should be called devm_drm_dev_put or something similar. >> I see what you mean, but I don't believe the 'put' is the best option, >> for 2 reasons: >> - in general, we have put paired with gets and this has not get equivalent > Yeah, that's true. _release is fine then I guess. > >> - this bypass the regular get/put mechanism and forces the releases that >> would be done only after all drm_dev_put() taking ref to zero. > I don't think it does? devm_release_action will only remove the devm > action and execute it directly, but this action here is a call to > drm_dev_put, so we might still have other references taken that would > defer the device being freed. yes i.e right, i assumed drm_dev_unplug would close all client handles but no. So i was thinking if it is ok to iterate over  no of clients and call drm_dev_put in either drm_dev_unplug or as part of this devm_release. Thanks, Aravind. > > Maxime