Linux kernel -stable discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tomita Moeko <tomitamoeko@gmail.com>
To: "Lucas De Marchi" <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
	"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
	Tomita Moeko <tomitamoeko@gmail.com>,
	Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>,
	Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>,
	Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH 6.12 2/4] Revert "drm/xe/tests/mocs: Update xe_force_wake_get() return handling"
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2025 19:05:23 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250729110525.49838-3-tomitamoeko@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250729110525.49838-1-tomitamoeko@gmail.com>

This reverts commit 95a75ed2b005447f96fbd4ac61758ccda44069d1.

The reverted commit updated the handling of xe_force_wake_get to match
the new "return refcounted domain mask" semantics introduced in commit
a7ddcea1f5ac ("drm/xe: Error handling in xe_force_wake_get()"). However,
that API change only exists in 6.13 and later.

In 6.12 stable kernel, xe_force_wake_get still returns a status code.
The update incorrectly treats the return value as a mask, causing the
return value of 0 to be misinterpreted as an error.

Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Cc: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
Cc: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
Cc: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomita Moeko <tomitamoeko@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_mocs.c | 21 ++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_mocs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_mocs.c
index 61a7d20ce42b..bf3f97d0c9c7 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_mocs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_mocs.c
@@ -43,14 +43,12 @@ static void read_l3cc_table(struct xe_gt *gt,
 {
 	struct kunit *test = kunit_get_current_test();
 	u32 l3cc, l3cc_expected;
-	unsigned int fw_ref, i;
+	unsigned int i;
 	u32 reg_val;
+	u32 ret;
 
-	fw_ref = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL);
-	if (!xe_force_wake_ref_has_domain(fw_ref, XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL)) {
-		xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), fw_ref);
-		KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE_MSG(test, true, "Forcewake Failed.\n");
-	}
+	ret = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL);
+	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test, ret, 0, "Forcewake Failed.\n");
 
 	for (i = 0; i < info->num_mocs_regs; i++) {
 		if (!(i & 1)) {
@@ -74,7 +72,7 @@ static void read_l3cc_table(struct xe_gt *gt,
 		KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, l3cc_expected, l3cc,
 				    "l3cc idx=%u has incorrect val.\n", i);
 	}
-	xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), fw_ref);
+	xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL);
 }
 
 static void read_mocs_table(struct xe_gt *gt,
@@ -82,14 +80,15 @@ static void read_mocs_table(struct xe_gt *gt,
 {
 	struct kunit *test = kunit_get_current_test();
 	u32 mocs, mocs_expected;
-	unsigned int fw_ref, i;
+	unsigned int i;
 	u32 reg_val;
+	u32 ret;
 
 	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE_MSG(test, info->unused_entries_index,
 			      "Unused entries index should have been defined\n");
 
-	fw_ref = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
-	KUNIT_ASSERT_NE_MSG(test, fw_ref, 0, "Forcewake Failed.\n");
+	ret = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
+	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test, ret, 0, "Forcewake Failed.\n");
 
 	for (i = 0; i < info->num_mocs_regs; i++) {
 		if (regs_are_mcr(gt))
@@ -107,7 +106,7 @@ static void read_mocs_table(struct xe_gt *gt,
 				    "mocs reg 0x%x has incorrect val.\n", i);
 	}
 
-	xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), fw_ref);
+	xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
 }
 
 static int mocs_kernel_test_run_device(struct xe_device *xe)
-- 
2.47.2


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-07-29 11:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-29 11:05 [PATCH 6.12 0/4] drm/xe: Fix xe_force_wake_get return handling Tomita Moeko
2025-07-29 11:05 ` [PATCH 6.12 1/4] Revert "drm/xe/gt: Update handling of xe_force_wake_get return" Tomita Moeko
2025-07-29 21:03   ` Sasha Levin
2025-07-29 11:05 ` Tomita Moeko [this message]
2025-07-29 19:45   ` [PATCH 6.12 2/4] Revert "drm/xe/tests/mocs: Update xe_force_wake_get() return handling" Sasha Levin
2025-07-29 11:05 ` [PATCH 6.12 3/4] Revert "drm/xe/devcoredump: Update handling of xe_force_wake_get return" Tomita Moeko
2025-07-29 19:45   ` Sasha Levin
2025-07-29 11:05 ` [PATCH 6.12 4/4] Revert "drm/xe/forcewake: Add a helper xe_force_wake_ref_has_domain()" Tomita Moeko
2025-07-29 14:51   ` Greg KH
2025-07-29 21:29     ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-07-29 19:37   ` Sasha Levin

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=20250729110525.49838-3-tomitamoeko@gmail.com \
    --to=tomitamoeko@gmail.com \
    --cc=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
    --cc=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
    --cc=nirmoy.das@intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.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