On 2018-12-07 09:22, Sean Paul wrote:
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 12:27:42PM -0800, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
On 2018-12-03 06:21, Sean Paul wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 04:21:15PM -0800, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
> > On 2018-11-30 12:07, Sean Paul wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:45:55AM -0800, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
> > > > On 2018-11-29 14:15, Sean Paul wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 02:04:14PM -0800, Jeykumar Sankaran
wrote:
> > > > > > On 2018-11-07 07:55, Sean Paul wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 02:36:30PM -0800, Jeykumar
Sankaran
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > msm maintains a separate structure to define vblank
> > > > > > > > work definitions and a list to track events submitted
> > > > > > > > to the workqueue. We can avoid this redundant list
> > > > > > > > and its protection mechanism, if we subclass the
> > > > > > > > work object to encapsulate vblank event parameters.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > changes in v2:
> > > > > > > > - subclass optimization on system wq (Sean Paul)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I wouldn't do it like this, tbh. One problem is that
you've
> lost
> > > your
> > > > > > > flush() on
> > > > > > > unbind, so there's no way to know if you have workers in
the
> wild
> > > > > > > waiting
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > enable/disable vblank.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Another issues is that AFAICT, we don't need a queue of
> > > > > > > enables/disables,
> > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > rather just the last requested state (ie: should we be on
or
> off).
> > > So
> > > > > > > things
> > > > > > > don't need to be this complicated (and we're possibly
> thrashing
> > > vblank
> > > > > > > on/off
> > > > > > > for no reason).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm still of the mind that you should just make this
> synchronous
> > > and
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > done
> > > > > > > with the threads (especially since we're still
> > > uncovering/introducing
> > > > > > > races!).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > While scoping out the effort to make vblank events
synchronous,
> I
> > > > > > found
> > > > > > that the spinlock locking order of vblank request sequence
and
> > > vblank
> > > > > > callback
> > > > > > sequences are the opposite.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In DPU, drm_vblank_enable acquires vblank_time_lock before
> > > registering
> > > > > > the crtc to encoder which happens after acquiring
> encoder_spinlock.
> > > > > > But
> > > > > > the vblank_callback acquires encoder_spinlock before
accessing
> the
> > > > > > registered
> > > > > > crtc and calling into drm_vblank_handler which tries to
acquire
> > > > > > vblank_time_lock.
> > > > > > Acquiring both vblank_time_lock and encoder_spinlock in the
same
> > > > > > thread
> > > > > > is leading to deadlock.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmm, I'm not sure I follow. Are you seeing issues where irq
> overlaps
> > > > > with
> > > > > enable/disable? I hacked in sync vblank enable/disable quickly
to
> see
> > > if
> > > > > I
> > > > > could
> > > > > reproduce what you're seeing, but things seemed well behaved.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > The race is between drm_vblank_get/put and vblank_handler
contexts.
> > > >
> > > > When made synchronous:
> > > >
> > > > while calling drm_vblank_get, the callstack looks like below:
> > > > drm_vblank_get -> drm_vblank_enable (acquires vblank_time_lock)
->
> > > > __enable_vblank -> dpu_crtc_vblank ->
> > > > dpu_encoder_toggle_vblank_for_crtc
> > > > (tries to acquire enc_spinlock)
> > > >
> > > > In vblank handler, the call stack will be:
> > > > dpu_encoder_phys_vid_vblank_irq -> dpu_encoder_vblank_callback
> > > > (acquires
> > > > enc_spinlock) -> dpu_crtc_vblank_callback -> drm_handle_vblank
> > > > (tries to
> > > > acquire vblank_time_lock)
> > >
> > > Hmm, I'm not sure how this can happen. We acquire and release the
> > > enc_spinlock
> > > before enabling the irq, yes we will hold on to the vbl_time_lock,
but
> > > we
> > > shouldn't be trying to reacquire an encoder's spinlock after we've
> > > enabled
> > > it.
> > In the synchronous approach dpu_encoder_toggle_vblank_for_crtc(which
> > acquires the enc_spinlock) will be called while we
> > are holding the vbl_time_lock.
> >
> > > I don't know how that can deadlock, since we should never be
running
> > > enable and
> > > the handler concurrently.
> > >
> > I agree that vblank_irq handler should not be running before the
> > enable
> > sequence. But
> > don't you expect the handler to be running while calling the
> vblank_disable
> > sequence?
>
> This is an entirely different problem though. It's also one that is
> easier
> to
> fix. I think we could probably grab the enc_spinlock in disable and
> clear
> the
> crtc pointer.
>
we do hold enc_spinlock in dpu_encoder_assign_crtc (drm/msm: dpu:
Remove
vblank_callback from encoder)
where we clear the crtc pointer.
> What I'm getting at is that there's no fundamental reason why we need
to
> have
> async vblank enable/disable.
>
> Sean
>
There is really no *need* to have them async. But I believe the reason
why
they
are implemented this way is to avoid deadlock between the below two
paths.
Restating the above findings:
vblank_handlers and vblank enable/disable can run concurrently.
I think this is where we disagree. The handler will only be called when
enc->crtc is set.
In the case of disable, we clear the pointer _after_ vblank is
disabled, so enc_spinlock should be uncontested.
On enable, the pointer is set _before_ vblank is enabled, so again the
enc_spinlock is uncontested.
I tracked down the deadlock you found and submitted a patch for it in
[1].
The
issue is that vblank was being incorrectly enabled whenever the encoder
is
on.
With the fix, you can add however long delay you want to vblank_enable
and
you
won't produce a deadlock.
Sean
[1]-
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2018-December/199670.html
I am aware of the bug in DPU which enables vsync irq before
vblank_enable is called. That is
why I tried to explain the concurrency during vblank_disable. Your patch
certainly fixes
the enable sequence. But the deadlock is still reproducible during
vblank_disable.
Below are the logs I could collect during deadlock:
[ 13.448254] [drm:dpu_encoder_vblank_callback:1242] vbl:
dpu_encoder_vblank_callback - acquire enc_spinlock
[ 13.458187] vbl: drm_handle_vblank - acquire vblank_time_lock
[ 13.472993] [drm:dpu_encoder_phys_vid_vblank_irq:319] vbl:
dpu_encoder_phys_vid_vblank_irq
[ 13.481586] [drm:dpu_encoder_vblank_callback:1242] vbl:
dpu_encoder_vblank_callback - acquire enc_spinlock
[ 13.491518] vbl: drm_handle_vblank - acquire vblank_time_lock
--> vblank_disable 5 sec timer expires
[Task 1] [ 13.506175] vbl: vblank_disable_fn - timer expires
--> vblank irq is fired.
[Task 2] [ 13.506326]
[drm:dpu_encoder_phys_vid_vblank_irq:319] vbl:
dpu_encoder_phys_vid_vblank_irq
--> Task 1 acquires vblank_time_lock
[Task 1] [ 13.511157] vbl: drm_vblank_disable_and_save -
acquire vblank_time_lock
--> Task 2 acquires enc spin lock
[Task 2] [ 13.519748] [drm:dpu_encoder_vblank_callback:1242]
vbl: dpu_encoder_vblank_callback - acquire enc_spinlock
--> Task 2 waiting for vblank_time_lock
[Task 2] [ 13.519757] vbl: drm_handle_vblank - acquire
vblank_time_lock
[Task 1] [ 13.526682] vbl: __disable_vblank
[Task 1] [ 13.546082] vbl: vblank_ctrl_queue_work
--> Task 1 waiting for enc_spinlock causing deadlock
[Task 1] [ 13.550068]
[drm:dpu_encoder_toggle_vblank_for_crtc:1287] vbl:
dpu_encoder_toggle_vblank_for_crtc - acquire enc_spinlock
Task 1 represents vblank_disable thread
Task 2 represents vblank irq handler thread
The patch I used for the additional logging as below:
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
index 98e0911..3874241 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
@@ -330,6 +330,8 @@ static void __disable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev,
unsigned int pipe)
}
}
+ pr_err("vbl: %s \n", __func__);
+
dev->driver->disable_vblank(dev, pipe);
}
@@ -350,6 +352,7 @@ void drm_vblank_disable_and_save(struct drm_device
*dev, unsigned int pipe)
* so no updates of timestamps or count can happen after we've
* disabled. Needed to prevent races in case of delayed irq's.
*/
+ pr_err("vbl: %s - acquire vblank_time_lock \n", __func__);
spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->vblank_time_lock, irqflags);
/*
@@ -382,6 +385,8 @@ static void vblank_disable_fn(struct timer_list *t)
unsigned int pipe = vblank->pipe;
unsigned long irqflags;
+ pr_err("vbl: %s - timer expires\n", __func__);
+
spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->vbl_lock, irqflags);
if (atomic_read(&vblank->refcount) == 0 && vblank->enabled) {
DRM_DEBUG("disabling vblank on crtc %u\n", pipe);
@@ -1685,7 +1690,7 @@ bool drm_handle_vblank(struct drm_device *dev,
unsigned int pipe)
struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = &dev->vblank[pipe];
unsigned long irqflags;
bool disable_irq;
-
+
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!dev->num_crtcs))
return false;
@@ -1694,6 +1699,9 @@ bool drm_handle_vblank(struct drm_device *dev,
unsigned int pipe)
spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->event_lock, irqflags);
+ pr_err("vbl: %s - acquire vblank_time_lock\n", __func__);
+
+
/* Need timestamp lock to prevent concurrent execution with
* vblank enable/disable, as this would cause inconsistent
* or corrupted timestamps and vblank counts.
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c
index 36158b7..c2e5f05 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c
@@ -1239,7 +1239,9 @@ static void dpu_encoder_vblank_callback(struct
drm_encoder *drm_enc,
DPU_ATRACE_BEGIN("encoder_vblank_callback");
dpu_enc = to_dpu_encoder_virt(drm_enc);
+ pr_err("vbl: %s - acquire enc_spinlock\n", __func__);
spin_lock_irqsave(&dpu_enc->enc_spinlock, lock_flags);
+
if (dpu_enc->crtc)
dpu_crtc_vblank_callback(dpu_enc->crtc);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dpu_enc->enc_spinlock, lock_flags);
@@ -1282,6 +1284,8 @@ void dpu_encoder_toggle_vblank_for_crtc(struct
drm_encoder *drm_enc,
trace_dpu_enc_vblank_cb(DRMID(drm_enc), enable);
+ pr_err("vbl: %s - acquire enc_spinlock\n", __func__);
+
spin_lock_irqsave(&dpu_enc->enc_spinlock, lock_flags);
if (dpu_enc->crtc != crtc) {
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dpu_enc->enc_spinlock,
lock_flags);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c
index e3125a1..a74f1a4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c
@@ -316,6 +316,8 @@ static void dpu_encoder_phys_vid_vblank_irq(void
*arg, int irq_idx)
DPU_ATRACE_BEGIN("vblank_irq");
+ pr_err("vbl: %s \n", __func__);
+
if (phys_enc->parent_ops->handle_vblank_virt)
phys_enc->parent_ops->handle_vblank_virt(phys_enc->parent,
phys_enc);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
index bd527b7..99b74f9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
@@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static int vblank_ctrl_queue_work(struct
msm_drm_private *priv,
unsigned long flags;
struct msm_kms *kms = priv->kms;
+ pr_err("vbl: %s\n", __func__);
spin_lock_irqsave(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
if (enable)
Thanks,
Jeykumar S.
The first
trying to acquire
vbl_time_lock holding enc_spinlock. Other trying to acquire
enc_spinlock
holding
vbl_time_lock.
Thanks,
Jeykumar S.
> > vbl disable will try to acquire the locks in the opposite order to
> > that
> of
> > irq_handler and the
> > same issue is bound to happen.
> >
> > With your patch, you should be able to simulate this deadlock if you
> > can
> > inject a delay
> > by adding a pr_err log in vblank_ctrl_queue_work
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jeykumar S.
> >
> > > The only thing I can think of is that the vblank interrupts are
firing
> > > after
> > > vblank has been disabled? In that case, it seems like we should
> properly
> > > flush
> > > them.
> > >
> > > Sean
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I do see that there is a chance to call drm_handle_vblank()
while
> > > > > holding
> > > > > enc_spinlock, but couldn't find any obvious lock recursion
there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe a callstack or lockdep splat would help?
> > > > >
> > > > > Sean
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Here's my hack to bypass the display thread:
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > > > > index 9c9f7ff6960b38..5a3cac5825319e 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > > > > @@ -242,24 +242,19 @@ static void vblank_ctrl_worker(struct
> > > kthread_work
> > > > > *work)
> > > > > static int vblank_ctrl_queue_work(struct msm_drm_private
*priv,
> > > > > int crtc_id, bool enable)
> > > > > {
> > > > > + struct msm_kms *kms = priv->kms;
> > > > > struct msm_vblank_ctrl *vbl_ctrl = &priv->vblank_ctrl;
> > > > > - struct vblank_event *vbl_ev;
> > > > > unsigned long flags;
> > > > >
> > > > > - vbl_ev = kzalloc(sizeof(*vbl_ev), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > > > > - if (!vbl_ev)
> > > > > - return -ENOMEM;
> > > > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
> > > > >
> > > > > - vbl_ev->crtc_id = crtc_id;
> > > > > - vbl_ev->enable = enable;
> > > > > + if (enable)
> > > > > + kms->funcs->enable_vblank(kms,
> priv->crtcs[crtc_id]);
> > > > > + else
> > > > > + kms->funcs->disable_vblank(kms,
> priv->crtcs[crtc_id]);
> > > > >
> > > > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
> > > > > - list_add_tail(&vbl_ev->node, &vbl_ctrl->event_list);
> > > > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
> > > > >
> > > > > - kthread_queue_work(&priv->disp_thread[crtc_id].worker,
> > > > > - &vbl_ctrl->work);
> > > > > -
> > > > > return 0;
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > Even with your patch above, I see frame is getting stuck but it
> > > > recovers
> > > in
> > > > a while.
> > > > The patch I tried was assigning
> > > crtc->funcs->enable_vblank/disable_vblank so
> > > > that
> > > > __enable_vblank can call crtc directly. But the above callstack
is
> > > > still
> > > > valid for your patch.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jeykumar S.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In MDP5, I see the same pattern between vblank_time_lock and
> > > list_lock
> > > > > which
> > > > > > is used to track the irq handlers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that explains why msm_drv is queuing the vblank
> > > > > > enable/disable
> > > > > > works to WQ after acquiring vblank_time_lock.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Jeykumar S.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sean
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeykumar Sankaran <jsanka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c | 67
> > > > > > > +++++++++++++------------------------------
> > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.h | 7 -----
> > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > > > > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > > > > > > > index 6d6c73b..8da5be2 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > > > > > > > @@ -203,61 +203,44 @@ u32 msm_readl(const void __iomem
> *addr)
> > > > > > > > return val;
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -struct vblank_event {
> > > > > > > > - struct list_head node;
> > > > > > > > +struct msm_vblank_work {
> > > > > > > > + struct work_struct work;
> > > > > > > > int crtc_id;
> > > > > > > > bool enable;
> > > > > > > > + struct msm_drm_private *priv;
> > > > > > > > };
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > static void vblank_ctrl_worker(struct work_struct
*work)
> > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > - struct msm_vblank_ctrl *vbl_ctrl =
container_of(work,
> > > > > > > > - struct
> > > msm_vblank_ctrl,
> > > > > > > work);
> > > > > > > > - struct msm_drm_private *priv =
container_of(vbl_ctrl,
> > > > > > > > - struct
msm_drm_private,
> > > > > > > vblank_ctrl);
> > > > > > > > + struct msm_vblank_work *vbl_work =
container_of(work,
> > > > > > > > + struct
> > > msm_vblank_work,
> > > > > > > work);
> > > > > > > > + struct msm_drm_private *priv = vbl_work->priv;
> > > > > > > > struct msm_kms *kms = priv->kms;
> > > > > > > > - struct vblank_event *vbl_ev, *tmp;
> > > > > > > > - unsigned long flags;
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
> > > > > > > > - list_for_each_entry_safe(vbl_ev, tmp,
> > > &vbl_ctrl->event_list, node)
> > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > - list_del(&vbl_ev->node);
> > > > > > > > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vbl_ctrl->lock,
flags);
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > - if (vbl_ev->enable)
> > > > > > > > - kms->funcs->enable_vblank(kms,
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > priv->crtcs[vbl_ev->crtc_id]);
> > > > > > > > - else
> > > > > > > > - kms->funcs->disable_vblank(kms,
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > priv->crtcs[vbl_ev->crtc_id]);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - kfree(vbl_ev);
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
> > > > > > > > - }
> > > > > > > > + if (vbl_work->enable)
> > > > > > > > + kms->funcs->enable_vblank(kms,
> > > > > > > priv->crtcs[vbl_work->crtc_id]);
> > > > > > > > + else
> > > > > > > > + kms->funcs->disable_vblank(kms,
> > > > > > > priv->crtcs[vbl_work->crtc_id]);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
> > > > > > > > + kfree(vbl_work);
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > static int vblank_ctrl_queue_work(struct
msm_drm_private
> *priv,
> > > > > > > > int crtc_id, bool
enable)
> > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > - struct msm_vblank_ctrl *vbl_ctrl =
&priv->vblank_ctrl;
> > > > > > > > - struct vblank_event *vbl_ev;
> > > > > > > > - unsigned long flags;
> > > > > > > > + struct msm_vblank_work *vbl_work;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - vbl_ev = kzalloc(sizeof(*vbl_ev), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > > > > > > > - if (!vbl_ev)
> > > > > > > > + vbl_work = kzalloc(sizeof(*vbl_work), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > > > > > > > + if (!vbl_work)
> > > > > > > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - vbl_ev->crtc_id = crtc_id;
> > > > > > > > - vbl_ev->enable = enable;
> > > > > > > > + INIT_WORK(&vbl_work->work, vblank_ctrl_worker);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
> > > > > > > > - list_add_tail(&vbl_ev->node,
&vbl_ctrl->event_list);
> > > > > > > > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vbl_ctrl->lock, flags);
> > > > > > > > + vbl_work->crtc_id = crtc_id;
> > > > > > > > + vbl_work->enable = enable;
> > > > > > > > + vbl_work->priv = priv;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - schedule_work(&vbl_ctrl->work);
> > > > > > > > + schedule_work(&vbl_work->work);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > @@ -269,14 +252,13 @@ static int msm_drm_uninit(struct
> device
> > > *dev)
> > > > > > > > struct msm_drm_private *priv = ddev->dev_private;
> > > > > > > > struct msm_kms *kms = priv->kms;
> > > > > > > > struct msm_mdss *mdss = priv->mdss;
> > > > > > > > - struct msm_vblank_ctrl *vbl_ctrl =
&priv->vblank_ctrl;
> > > > > > > > - struct vblank_event *vbl_ev, *tmp;
> > > > > > > > int i;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > /* We must cancel and cleanup any pending vblank
> > > enable/disable
> > > > > > > > * work before drm_irq_uninstall() to avoid work
> > > re-enabling an
> > > > > > > > * irq after uninstall has disabled it.
> > > > > > > > */
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > msm_gem_shrinker_cleanup(ddev);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > drm_kms_helper_poll_fini(ddev);
> > > > > > > > @@ -292,12 +274,6 @@ static int msm_drm_uninit(struct
device
> > > *dev)
> > > > > > > > #endif
> > > > > > > > drm_mode_config_cleanup(ddev);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - flush_work(&vbl_ctrl->work);
> > > > > > > > - list_for_each_entry_safe(vbl_ev, tmp,
> > > &vbl_ctrl->event_list, node)
> > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > - list_del(&vbl_ev->node);
> > > > > > > > - kfree(vbl_ev);
> > > > > > > > - }
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > /* clean up event worker threads */
> > > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < priv->num_crtcs; i++) {
> > > > > > > > if (priv->event_thread[i].thread) {
> > > > > > > > @@ -469,9 +445,6 @@ static int msm_drm_init(struct
device
> *dev,
> > > > > struct
> > > > > > > drm_driver *drv)
> > > > > > > > priv->wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("msm", 0);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&priv->inactive_list);
> > > > > > > > - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&priv->vblank_ctrl.event_list);
> > > > > > > > - INIT_WORK(&priv->vblank_ctrl.work,
vblank_ctrl_worker);
> > > > > > > > - spin_lock_init(&priv->vblank_ctrl.lock);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > drm_mode_config_init(ddev);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.h
> > > > > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.h
> > > > > > > > index 05d33a7..d4cbde2 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.h
> > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.h
> > > > > > > > @@ -77,12 +77,6 @@ enum msm_mdp_plane_property {
> > > > > > > > PLANE_PROP_MAX_NUM
> > > > > > > > };
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -struct msm_vblank_ctrl {
> > > > > > > > - struct work_struct work;
> > > > > > > > - struct list_head event_list;
> > > > > > > > - spinlock_t lock;
> > > > > > > > -};
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > #define MSM_GPU_MAX_RINGS 4
> > > > > > > > #define MAX_H_TILES_PER_DISPLAY 2
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @@ -225,7 +219,6 @@ struct msm_drm_private {
> > > > > > > > struct notifier_block vmap_notifier;
> > > > > > > > struct shrinker shrinker;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - struct msm_vblank_ctrl vblank_ctrl;
> > > > > > > > struct drm_atomic_state *pm_state;
> > > > > > > > };
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the
Code
> > > Aurora
> > > > > > > Forum,
> > > > > > > > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Freedreno mailing list
> > > > > > > > Freedreno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/freedreno
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jeykumar S
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jeykumar S
> >
> > --
> > Jeykumar S
--
Jeykumar S
--
Jeykumar S
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
