On 2/8/2022 01:39, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 08/02/2022 02:07, John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx>
A flag query helper was actually writing to the flags word rather than
just reading. Fix that. Also update the function's comment as it was
out of date.
Fixes: 0f7976506de61 ("drm/i915/guc: Rework and simplify locking")
Signed-off-by: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 7 ++-----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
index b3a429a92c0d..d9f4218f5ef4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
@@ -174,11 +174,8 @@ static inline void init_sched_state(struct
intel_context *ce)
__maybe_unused
static bool sched_state_is_init(struct intel_context *ce)
{
- /*
- * XXX: Kernel contexts can have SCHED_STATE_NO_LOCK_REGISTERED
after
- * suspend.
- */
- return !(ce->guc_state.sched_state &=
+ /* Kernel contexts can have SCHED_STATE_REGISTERED after
suspend. */
+ return !(ce->guc_state.sched_state &
~(SCHED_STATE_BLOCKED_MASK | SCHED_STATE_REGISTERED));
}
Looks important - what are the consequences?
Supposedly nothing.
The test was only ever used inside a BUG_ON during context registration.
Rather than asserting that the condition was true, it was making the
condition true. So, in theory, there was no consequence because we
should never have hit a BUG_ON anyway. Which means the write should
always have been a no-op.
Needs Cc: stable for 5.16?
Meaning "Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>"? Or is there anything required to
specify 5.16?
John.
Regards,
Tvrtko
