On 30/07/2019 00:47, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
We don't call the init_early function from within the gem code, so we
shouldn't do it for the cleanup either.
Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 2 ++
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 2 --
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
index f2d3d754af37..934e605e2466 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
@@ -951,6 +951,7 @@ static int i915_driver_early_probe(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
intel_uc_cleanup_early(&dev_priv->gt.uc);
i915_gem_cleanup_early(dev_priv);
err_workqueues:
+ intel_gt_cleanup_early(&dev_priv->gt);
i915_workqueues_cleanup(dev_priv);
return ret;
}
@@ -966,6 +967,7 @@ static void i915_driver_late_release(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
intel_power_domains_cleanup(dev_priv);
intel_uc_cleanup_early(&dev_priv->gt.uc);
i915_gem_cleanup_early(dev_priv);
+ intel_gt_cleanup_early(&dev_priv->gt);
i915_workqueues_cleanup(dev_priv);
pm_qos_remove_request(&dev_priv->sb_qos);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index ae4e7cc3e3f9..2c7dc3404759 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -1674,8 +1674,6 @@ void i915_gem_cleanup_early(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
GEM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&dev_priv->mm.free_count));
WARN_ON(dev_priv->mm.shrink_count);
- intel_gt_cleanup_early(&dev_priv->gt);
-
i915_gemfs_fini(dev_priv);
}
I have a nagging feeling it was me who added this asymmetry.
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
