Re: [v3 1/2] drm/xe: Add a new memory directory under tile

[Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>]

Hi Suja

On 12/8/2023 1:58 PM, Sundaresan, Sujaritha wrote:
> 
> On 12/8/2023 10:33 AM, Upadhyay, Tejas wrote:
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Sundaresan, Sujaritha <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 8:48 PM
>>> To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
>>> Cc: Upadhyay, Tejas <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>; Tauro, Riana
>>> <riana.tauro@intel.com>; Gupta, Anshuman <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>;
>>> Sundaresan, Sujaritha <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com>
>>> Subject: [v3 1/2] drm/xe: Add a new memory directory under tile
>>>
>>> Add a new memory directory under /device/tile<n> and move
>>> physical_vram_size attribute to the new directory.
>>>
>>> New hierarchy:
>>>
>>> /device/tile<n>/memory/physical_vram_size_bytes
>>>
>>> v2: Fix heading typo (Riana)
>>>      Fix cleanup error on unload/reload cycle
>>>
>>> v3: Fix reload error with kobject_put in place
>>>      of kobject_del (Tejas)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
>>>   1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c
>>> index 16376607c68f..64be1f3a38a9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c
>>> @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ static ssize_t
>>>   physical_vram_size_bytes_show(struct device *kdev, struct 
>>> device_attribute
>>> *attr,
>>>                     char *buf)
>>>   {
>>> -    struct xe_tile *tile = kobj_to_tile(&kdev->kobj);
>>> +    struct kobject *kobj = &kdev->kobj;
>>> +    struct xe_tile *tile = kobj_to_tile(kobj->parent);
>> As Christmas is approaching, you might want to adjust this in 
>> Christmas tree order.
>>
>>>       return sysfs_emit(buf, "%llu\n", 
>>> tile->mem.vram.actual_physical_size);
>>>   }
>>> @@ -36,8 +37,10 @@ static const struct attribute 
>>> *physical_memsize_attr =
>>>
>>>   static void tile_sysfs_fini(struct drm_device *drm, void *arg)  {
>>> -    struct xe_tile *tile = arg;
>>> +    struct kobject *kobj = arg;
>>> +    struct xe_tile *tile = kobj_to_tile(kobj->parent);
>> Ditto
>>
>>> +    kobject_put(kobj);
>>>       kobject_put(tile->sysfs);
>>>   }
>>>
>>> @@ -46,6 +49,7 @@ void xe_tile_sysfs_init(struct xe_tile *tile)
>>>       struct xe_device *xe = tile_to_xe(tile);
>>>       struct device *dev = xe->drm.dev;
>>>       struct kobj_tile *kt;
>>> +    struct kobject *kobj;
>>>       int err;
>>>
>>>       kt = kzalloc(sizeof(*kt), GFP_KERNEL); @@ -64,12 +68,17 @@ void
>>> xe_tile_sysfs_init(struct xe_tile *tile)
>>>
>>>       tile->sysfs = &kt->base;
>>>
>>> -    if (IS_DGFX(xe) && xe->info.platform != XE_DG1 &&
>>> -        sysfs_create_file(tile->sysfs, physical_memsize_attr))
>>> +    kobj = kobject_create_and_add("memory", tile->sysfs);
>>> +    if (!kobj) {
>>> +        drm_warn(&xe->drm, "%s failed, err: %d\n", __func__, -
>>> ENOMEM);
>>> +    }

There will be an empty memory directory in case of igfx. Should the 
memory directory be created only if there are attributes available?

Thanks
Riana
>> { } is not required here.
>>
>> Tejas
> 
> Will fix all of the above.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Suja
> 
>>> +
>>> +    if (kobj && IS_DGFX(xe) && xe->info.platform != XE_DG1 &&
>>> +        sysfs_create_file(kobj, physical_memsize_attr))
>>>           drm_warn(&xe->drm,
>>>                "Sysfs creation to read addr_range per tile failed\n");
>>>
>>> -    err = drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, tile_sysfs_fini, tile);
>>> +    err = drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, tile_sysfs_fini, kobj);
>>>       if (err) {
>>>           drm_warn(&xe->drm, "%s: drmm_add_action_or_reset
>>> failed, err: %d\n",
>>>                __func__, err);
>>> -- 
>>> 2.25.1