Re: [PATCH v10 9/9] drm/i915/guc: Fix GuC cleanup in unload path

[Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 9/27/2017 10:41 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:30:39 +0200, Sagar Arun Kamble 
> <sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > We ensure that GuC is completely suspended and client is destroyed
> > in i915_gem_suspend during i915_driver_unload. So now intel_uc_fini_hw
> > should just take care of cleanup,
> > hence s/intel_uc_fini_hw/intel_uc_cleanup. Correspondingly
> > we also updated as 
> > s/i915_guc_submission_fini/i915_guc_submission_cleanup
> > Other functionality to disable communication, disable interrupts and
> > update of ggtt.invalidate is taken care by intel_uc_suspend.
> >
> > v2: Rebase w.r.t removal of GuC code restructuring.
> >
> > v3: Removed intel_guc_cleanup. (Michal Wajdeczko)
> >
> > v4: guc_free_load_err_log() needs to be called without checking
> > i915.enable_guc_loading as this param is cleared on GuC load failure.
> > (Michal Wajdeczko)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c            |  2 +-
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c |  2 +-
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c            | 14 ++++----------
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h            |  4 ++--
> >  4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c 
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > index f79646b..4223cee 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > @@ -603,7 +603,7 @@ static void i915_gem_fini(struct drm_i915_private 
> > *dev_priv)
> >      i915_gem_drain_workqueue(dev_priv);
> >     mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
> > -    intel_uc_fini_hw(dev_priv);
> > +    intel_uc_cleanup(dev_priv);
> >      i915_gem_cleanup_engines(dev_priv);
> >      i915_gem_contexts_fini(dev_priv);
> >      i915_gem_cleanup_userptr(dev_priv);
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c 
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
> > index 45f2ee8..0ac9bd4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
> > @@ -1053,7 +1053,7 @@ int i915_guc_submission_init(struct 
> > drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> >      return ret;
> >  }
> > -void i915_guc_submission_fini(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > +void i915_guc_submission_cleanup(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> >  {
> >      struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c 
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
> > index 59e6995..0370265 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
> > @@ -439,7 +439,7 @@ int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private 
> > *dev_priv)
> >      guc_capture_load_err_log(guc);
> >  err_submission:
> >      if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission)
> > -        i915_guc_submission_fini(dev_priv);
> > +        i915_guc_submission_cleanup(dev_priv);
> >  err_guc:
> >      i915_ggtt_disable_guc(dev_priv);
> > @@ -461,21 +461,15 @@ int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private 
> > *dev_priv)
> >      return ret;
> >  }
> > -void intel_uc_fini_hw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > +void intel_uc_cleanup(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> >  {
> >      guc_free_load_err_log(&dev_priv->guc);
> >     if (!i915_modparams.enable_guc_loading)
> >          return;
> > -    guc_disable_communication(&dev_priv->guc);
> > -
> > -    if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission) {
> > -        gen9_disable_guc_interrupts(dev_priv);
> > -        i915_guc_submission_fini(dev_priv);
> > -    }
> > -
> > -    i915_ggtt_disable_guc(dev_priv);
> > +    if (i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission)
>
> In patch 6/9 you said we should avoid looking at user params
> but here you're still using it ...
Yes. I thought of taking that up in new series. Should I add another 
patch in this series itself to update such snippets?

> > + i915_guc_submission_cleanup(dev_priv);
> >  }
> > /**
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h 
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
> > index 78ccbd9..838a364 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
> > @@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ struct intel_huc {
> >  void intel_uc_init_fw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> >  void intel_uc_fini_fw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> >  int intel_uc_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > -void intel_uc_fini_hw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > +void intel_uc_cleanup(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> >  int intel_uc_runtime_suspend(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> >  int intel_uc_runtime_resume(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> >  int intel_uc_suspend(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ static inline void intel_guc_notify(struct 
> > intel_guc *guc)
> >  int i915_guc_submission_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> >  int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> >  void i915_guc_submission_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > -void i915_guc_submission_fini(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > +void i915_guc_submission_cleanup(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> >  struct i915_vma *intel_guc_allocate_vma(struct intel_guc *guc, u32 
> > size);
> > /* intel_guc_log.c */

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx