Re: [PATCH v5 03/21] gpu: host1x: Show number of pending waiters in debugfs

[Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>]

02.04.2021 00:19, Michał Mirosław пишет:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 04:34:13PM +0200, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
>> On 3/23/21 12:16 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 03:00:01PM +0200, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
>>>> Show the number of pending waiters in the debugfs status file.
>>>> This is useful for testing to verify that waiters do not leak
>>>> or accumulate incorrectly.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@nvidia.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/gpu/host1x/debug.c | 14 +++++++++++---
>>>>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/host1x/debug.c b/drivers/gpu/host1x/debug.c
>>>> index 1b4997bda1c7..8a14880c61bb 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/host1x/debug.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/host1x/debug.c
>>>> @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ static int show_channel(struct host1x_channel *ch, void *data, bool show_fifo)
>>>>   static void show_syncpts(struct host1x *m, struct output *o)
>>>>   {
>>>> +	struct list_head *pos;
>>>>   	unsigned int i;
>>>>   	host1x_debug_output(o, "---- syncpts ----\n");
>>>> @@ -76,12 +77,19 @@ static void show_syncpts(struct host1x *m, struct output *o)
>>>>   	for (i = 0; i < host1x_syncpt_nb_pts(m); i++) {
>>>>   		u32 max = host1x_syncpt_read_max(m->syncpt + i);
>>>>   		u32 min = host1x_syncpt_load(m->syncpt + i);
>>>> +		unsigned int waiters = 0;
>>>> -		if (!min && !max)
>>>> +		spin_lock(&m->syncpt[i].intr.lock);
>>>> +		list_for_each(pos, &m->syncpt[i].intr.wait_head)
>>>> +			waiters++;
>>>> +		spin_unlock(&m->syncpt[i].intr.lock);
>>>
>>> Would it make sense to keep a running count so that we don't have to
>>> compute it here?
>>
>> Considering this is just a debug facility, I think I prefer not adding a new
>> field just for it.
> 
> This looks like IRQ-disabled region, so unless only root can trigger
> this code, maybe the additional field could save a potential headache?
> How many waiters can there be in the worst case?

The host1x's IRQ handler runs in a workqueue, so it should be okay.