Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Modify psr_wait_for_idle to be reused.

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

 



Quoting Tarun Vyas (2018-05-14 21:49:20)
> intel_pipe_update_start also needs to wait for PSR to idle
> out. Need some minor modifications in psr_wait_for_idle in
> order to reuse it.
> 
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Tarun Vyas <tarun.vyas@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> index db27f2faa1de..40aafc0f4513 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> @@ -889,11 +889,15 @@ static bool psr_wait_for_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>         i915_reg_t reg;
>         u32 mask;
>         int err;
> +       bool wait = false;
> +
> +       mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>  
>         intel_dp = dev_priv->psr.enabled;
>         if (!intel_dp)
> -               return false;
> +               goto unlock;
>  
> +       wait = true;
>         if (HAS_DDI(dev_priv)) {
>                 if (dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled) {
>                         reg = EDP_PSR2_STATUS;
> @@ -911,15 +915,18 @@ static bool psr_wait_for_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>                 mask = VLV_EDP_PSR_IN_TRANS;
>         }
>  
> +unlock:
>         mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>  
> -       err = intel_wait_for_register(dev_priv, reg, mask, 0, 50);
> -       if (err)
> -               DRM_ERROR("Timed out waiting for PSR Idle for re-enable\n");
> +       if(wait) {
> +               err = intel_wait_for_register(dev_priv, reg, mask, 0, 50);
> +               if (err) {
> +                       DRM_ERROR("Timed out waiting for PSR Idle for re-enable\n");
> +                       wait = false;
> +               }
> +       }
>  
> -       /* After the unlocked wait, verify that PSR is still wanted! */
> -       mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
> -       return err == 0 && dev_priv->psr.enabled;
> +       return wait;
>  }
>  
>  static void intel_psr_work(struct work_struct *work)
> @@ -927,7 +934,6 @@ static void intel_psr_work(struct work_struct *work)
>         struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv =
>                 container_of(work, typeof(*dev_priv), psr.work.work);
>  
> -       mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>  
>         /*
>          * We have to make sure PSR is ready for re-enable
> @@ -936,14 +942,15 @@ static void intel_psr_work(struct work_struct *work)
>          * and be ready for re-enable.
>          */
>         if (!psr_wait_for_idle(dev_priv))
> -               goto unlock;
> +               return;
>  
> -       /*
> +       /* After the unlocked wait, verify that PSR is still wanted!
>          * The delayed work can race with an invalidate hence we need to
>          * recheck. Since psr_flush first clears this and then reschedules we
>          * won't ever miss a flush when bailing out here.
>          */
> -       if (dev_priv->psr.busy_frontbuffer_bits)
> +       mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
> +       if (dev_priv->psr.enabled && dev_priv->psr.busy_frontbuffer_bits)
>                 goto unlock;

I'm not sold on the locking dropping here, doing so inside the wait is
bad enough. (And do we need to there anyway?)

Since you need to introduce intel_psr_wait_for_idle() anyway, how about

void intel_psr_wait_for_idle(...)
{
	mutex_lock(&i915->psr.lock);
	psr_wait_for_idle();
	mutex_unlock(&i915->psr.lock);
}
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux