On Mon, 25 Sep 2023, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Nirmoy, > > you forgot the v2 here. > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 03:49:38PM +0200, Nirmoy Das wrote: >> From: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Where applicable, use for_each_gt instead of to_gt in the >> i915_gem_shrinker functions to make them apply to more than just the >> primary GT. Specifically, this ensure i915_gem_shrink_all retires all >> requests across all GTs, and this makes i915_gem_shrinker_vmap unmap >> VMAs from all GTs. >> >> v2: Pass correct GT to intel_gt_retire_requests(Andrzej). >> >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@xxxxxxxxx> >> Reviewed-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@xxxxxxxxx> > > [...] > >> - if (shrink & I915_SHRINK_ACTIVE) >> - /* Retire requests to unpin all idle contexts */ >> - intel_gt_retire_requests(to_gt(i915)); >> + if (shrink & I915_SHRINK_ACTIVE) { >> + for_each_gt(gt, i915, i) >> + /* Retire requests to unpin all idle contexts */ >> + intel_gt_retire_requests(gt); >> + } > > These two brackets are not needed. > >> >> /* >> * As we may completely rewrite the (un)bound list whilst unbinding >> @@ -389,6 +393,8 @@ i915_gem_shrinker_vmap(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long event, void *ptr >> struct i915_vma *vma, *next; >> unsigned long freed_pages = 0; >> intel_wakeref_t wakeref; >> + struct intel_gt *gt; >> + int i; > > the trend is to use 'unsigned int' here and I've seen it > reviewed. Personally, if I really have to express a preference, I > prefer 'int' because it's a bit safer, generally I don't really > mind :) Always use int over unsigned int if you don't have a specific reason not to. ("It can't be negative" is not a good reason.) BR, Jani. > > The rest looks good. > > Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Andi -- Jani Nikula, Intel