Re: [PATCH 05/15] drm/panfrost: use spinlock instead of atomic

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2020-05-10 17:55, Clément Péron wrote:
Convert busy_count to a simple int protected by spinlock.

A little more reasoning might be nice.

Signed-off-by: Clément Péron <peron.clem@xxxxxxxxx>
---
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_devfreq.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_devfreq.h
index 0697f8d5aa34..e6629900a618 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_devfreq.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_devfreq.h
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
  #ifndef __PANFROST_DEVFREQ_H__
  #define __PANFROST_DEVFREQ_H__
+#include <linux/spinlock.h>
  #include <linux/ktime.h>
struct devfreq;
@@ -14,10 +15,17 @@ struct panfrost_device;
  struct panfrost_devfreq {
  	struct devfreq *devfreq;
  	struct thermal_cooling_device *cooling;
+
  	ktime_t busy_time;
  	ktime_t idle_time;
  	ktime_t time_last_update;
-	atomic_t busy_count;
+	int busy_count;
+	/*
+	 * Protect busy_time, idle_time, time_last_update and busy_count
+	 * because these can be updated concurrently, for example by the GP
+	 * and PP interrupts.
+	 */

Nit: this comment is clearly wrong, since we only have Job, GPU and MMU interrupts here. I guess if there is a race it would be between submission/completion/timeout on different job slots.

Given that, should this actually be considered a fix for 9e62b885f715 ("drm/panfrost: Simplify devfreq utilisation tracking")?

Robin.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux