From: "Nilawar, Badal" <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
To: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>, <linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org>,
<anshuman.gupta@intel.com>, <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>,
<linux@roeck-us.net>, <riana.tauro@intel.com>,
<matthew.brost@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Add HWMON infrastructure
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2023 18:55:42 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3e294a80-3fde-13bb-4cd0-e5d19fca65b4@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZMrbZXOVsyT133D8@ashyti-mobl2.lan>
On 03-08-2023 04:10, Andi Shyti wrote:
> Hi Badal,
>
> [...]
>
>> +struct xe_hwmon_data {
>> + struct device *hwmon_dev;
>> + struct xe_gt *gt;
>> + char name[12];
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct xe_hwmon {
>> + struct xe_hwmon_data ddat;
>> + struct mutex hwmon_lock;
>> +};
>
> why do we need two structures here? Can we merge them?
In my previous series I mentioned its require to hold multiple hwmon
devices.
>
>> +static const struct hwmon_channel_info *hwmon_info[] = {
>> + NULL
>> +};
>
> just:
>
> static const struct hwmon_channel_info *hwmon_info[] = { };
>
> would do.
sure
>
>> +static umode_t
>> +hwmon_is_visible(const void *drvdata, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
>> + u32 attr, int channel)
>> +{
>> + struct xe_hwmon_data *ddat = (struct xe_hwmon_data *)drvdata;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + xe_device_mem_access_get(gt_to_xe(ddat->gt));
>> +
>> + switch (type) {
>> + default:
>> + ret = 0;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> +
>> + xe_device_mem_access_put(gt_to_xe(ddat->gt));
>> +
>> + return ret;
>
> OK... we are forced to go through the switch and initialize ret.
> Would be nicer to initialize ret to '0'... but it's not
> important, feel free to ignore this comment if the compiler
> doesn't complain.
>
>> +}
>
> [...]
>
>> + /* hwmon_dev points to device hwmon<i> */
>> + hwmon_dev = devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(dev, ddat->name,
>> + ddat,
>> + &hwmon_chip_info,
>> + NULL);
>> + if (IS_ERR(hwmon_dev)) {
>> + drm_warn(&xe->drm, "Fail to register xe hwmon, Err:%ld\n", PTR_ERR(hwmon_dev));
>
> I think this is better:
>
> drm_warn(&xe->drm, "Fail to register xe hwmon (%pe)\n", hwmon_dev);
Sure
>
>> + xe->hwmon = NULL;
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ddat->hwmon_dev = hwmon_dev;
>> +}
>> +
>> +void xe_hwmon_unregister(struct xe_device *xe)
>> +{
>> + xe->hwmon = NULL;
>
> I think this is not necessary. Will xe check for hwmon at some
> point?
Yes this not needed as we are using devm_hwmon* function to register
hwmon but in i915 patches this was suggested for sanity. I will remove
this function.
Regards,
Badal
>
> Andi
>
>> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-04 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-02 13:52 [PATCH v3 0/6] Add HWMON support for DGFX Badal Nilawar
2023-08-02 13:52 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Add HWMON infrastructure Badal Nilawar
2023-08-02 14:15 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-02 22:40 ` Andi Shyti
2023-08-02 23:11 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-02 23:34 ` Andi Shyti
2023-08-03 0:06 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-02 23:12 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-04 13:19 ` Nilawar, Badal
2023-08-04 14:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-04 14:36 ` Nilawar, Badal
2023-08-08 21:31 ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-08 22:07 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-11 16:01 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-11 17:39 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-11 18:48 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-04 14:43 ` Nilawar, Badal
2023-08-04 13:25 ` Nilawar, Badal [this message]
2023-08-02 13:52 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Expose power attributes Badal Nilawar
2023-08-02 23:23 ` Andi Shyti
2023-08-04 14:21 ` Nilawar, Badal
2023-08-02 13:52 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Expose card reactive critical power Badal Nilawar
2023-08-02 23:28 ` Andi Shyti
2023-08-04 13:31 ` Nilawar, Badal
2023-08-02 13:52 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Expose input voltage attribute Badal Nilawar
2023-08-02 23:32 ` Andi Shyti
2023-08-04 13:30 ` Nilawar, Badal
2023-08-02 13:52 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Expose hwmon energy attribute Badal Nilawar
2023-08-02 14:14 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-03 6:34 ` Nilawar, Badal
2023-08-03 14:42 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-08-02 13:52 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Expose power1_max_interval Badal Nilawar
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=3e294a80-3fde-13bb-4cd0-e5d19fca65b4@intel.com \
--to=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
--cc=andi.shyti@linux.intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=riana.tauro@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