On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 07:38:31 -0800, Nirmoy Das wrote:
>
Hi Nirmoy,
> Fix the __intel_wakeref_put() doc to reflect current behaviour.
>
> Fixes: c7302f204490 ("drm/i915: Defer final intel_wakeref_put to process context")
Seems to be d91e657876a9?
> Signed-off-by: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h | 10 ++++------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
> index 4f4c2e15e736..b5e1c61b5003 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
> @@ -135,14 +135,12 @@ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
> * @flags: control flags
> *
> * Release our hold on the wakeref. When there are no more users,
> - * the runtime pm wakeref will be released after the @fn callback is called
> - * underneath the wakeref mutex.
> + * the runtime pm wakeref will be released after the intel_wakeref_ops->put()
> + * callback is called underneath the wakeref mutex.
> *
> - * Note that @fn is allowed to fail, in which case the runtime-pm wakeref
> - * is retained and an error reported.
> + * Note that intel_wakeref_ops->put() is allowed to fail, in which case the
> + * runtime-pm wakeref is retained.
@fn is used in multiple places in this file (including some 'get' usages)
so maybe needs to be fixed there too. Maybe better to just say somewhere
@fn refers to ops->get()/put() where applicable?
> *
> - * Returns: 0 if the wakeref was released successfully, or a negative error
> - * code otherwise.
So this seems to be the reason for the patch...
> */
> static inline void
> __intel_wakeref_put(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
> --
> 2.38.0
>
Thanks.
--
Ashutosh
