On 2021-09-16 11:38:55 [+0200], Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Patches look good. Thank you for looking. > For both patches: > > Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I've been looking at running i915 with the -rt patch series, and > noticed i915_request_submit fails with GEM_BUG_ON(!irqs_disabled()); > presumably same failure exists for i915_request_unsubmit(). > > Might be worth removing those checks as well? Seems double with > lockdep_assert_held on an irq lock anyway. yes, let me prepare something in a few. > I've also noticed the local_irq_disable/enable is removed from > intel_pipe_update_(start/end) in the rt series. It might make sense > from a -rt point of view, but that code needs to run without > interruptions, or i915 may show visual glitches or even locks up the > system. > > It should just be a set of registers hammered in, but the code might > needs to be fixed to take the mmio lock as outer lock, and become a > strict set of register read/writes only. Let me see. So Anton Lundin (Cc:) reported glitches due to _this_ patch on -RT. I have just a Sandybridge around with a i915 and it does not get near that code here. > ~Maarten Sebastian
