On 14/02/17 12:01 PM, Samuel Pitoiset wrote: > > > On 02/14/2017 05:41 PM, Tom St Denis wrote: >> On 14/02/17 10:08 AM, Samuel Pitoiset wrote: >>> Totally untested but as long as read_sensor() has been recently >>> implemented for dpm based boards, amdgpu_sensors can now be >>> exposed. >>> >>> v2: - make sure read_sensor is not NULL on dpm chips >>> - keep sanity check for powerplay chips >>> >>> Cc: Tom St Denis <tom.stdenis at amd.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Samuel Pitoiset <samuel.pitoiset at gmail.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c >>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c >>> index 6f021e70f15f..80821b436aeb 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c >>> @@ -3204,6 +3204,9 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_debugfs_sensor_read(struct >>> file *f, char __user *buf, >>> valuesize = sizeof(values); >>> if (adev->powerplay.pp_funcs && >>> adev->powerplay.pp_funcs->read_sensor) >>> r = >>> adev->powerplay.pp_funcs->read_sensor(adev->powerplay.pp_handle, idx, >>> &values[0], &valuesize); >>> + else if (adev->pm.funcs && adev->pm.funcs->read_sensor) >>> + r = adev->pm.funcs->read_sensor(adev, idx, &values[0], >>> + &valuesize); >>> else >>> return -EINVAL; >>> >>> >> >> Sorry NAK again, even with dpm=0 those function pointers are set and you >> end up inside the dpm code trying to parse data structures that aren't >> initialized. > > No worries. I thought that check was enough. Anyway, writing code > without the hardware should be avoided. :) > > Can you try the thing suggested by Alex? Because I will need to fix up > the DRM ioctl codepath as well. Sure, I'm building a module with a amdgpu_dpm check near the top of the debugfs read function. Tom
