On Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 03:05:37PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> Don't hide display probe in device info code. >> >> Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c | 2 ++ >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c | 2 -- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/mock_gem_device.c | 2 ++ >> 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >> index f8dbee7a5af7..b5e1f72cc3ce 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c >> @@ -735,6 +735,8 @@ i915_driver_create(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent) >> /* Set up device info and initial runtime info. */ >> intel_device_info_driver_create(i915, pdev->device, match_info); >> >> + intel_display_device_probe(i915); >> + >> return i915; >> } >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c >> index b9b8b22540cb..d2ed0f057cb2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c >> @@ -418,8 +418,6 @@ void intel_device_info_driver_create(struct drm_i915_private *i915, >> runtime = RUNTIME_INFO(i915); >> memcpy(runtime, &INTEL_INFO(i915)->__runtime, sizeof(*runtime)); >> >> - intel_display_device_probe(i915); >> - >> runtime->device_id = device_id; >> } >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/mock_gem_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/mock_gem_device.c >> index da0b269606c5..7de6477803f8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/mock_gem_device.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/mock_gem_device.c >> @@ -181,6 +181,8 @@ struct drm_i915_private *mock_gem_device(void) >> /* Set up device info and initial runtime info. */ >> intel_device_info_driver_create(i915, pdev->device, &mock_info); >> >> + intel_display_device_probe(i915); >> + > > I realize this call was already happening with the old code, but do we > really want to be probing the (real) display hardware while setting up > mock (fake hardware) selftests? I don't think any of the mock tests > should be doing anything display-related, and if they did we'd probably > want to add some kind of mock_display_device_probe() instead or using > the real hardware? Thought about it, probably not, but decided it should be a separate patch. BR, Jani. > > > Matt > >> dev_pm_domain_set(&pdev->dev, &pm_domain); >> pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev); >> pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend(&pdev->dev); >> -- >> 2.39.2 >> -- Jani Nikula, Intel
