On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:11:34AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > A bunch of warnings fire on some ->irq_postinstall hooks since those > can enable interrupts (e.g. rps interrupts). And then our ordering > self-checks fire and complain. > > To fix that set the tracking boolen before enabling the irqs with > drm_irq_install. Quoting the discussion with Jesse why that's safe: > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Yes, it might work, but if you look through the history, we set this > > field carefully; first to true in the irq_init code, then to false only > > after the irq_install completes. So I think your fragility arguments > > apply to this change too. > > Well we've done it in 4 commits or so, but currently we have: > > - Set irqs_disabled to true early in driver load to make sure checks > that. That's done in irq_init, which is totally not the function that > enables interrupts, only the function that initializes all the vtables > and similar things. We actually have a fairly sane naming scheme > nowadays (not fully consistent ofc): _init is sw setup, > _enable/_hw_init is the actual hw setup. That is done in > 95f25beddba2ec9510b249740bacc11eca70cf75 > > - Set irqs_disabled to false right after the irqs are actually > enabled. This is done in ed2e6df18935beb3d63613c50103bf9757b2aa85 > > So my change should only move the flag change over the ->preinstall > and ->postinstall hooks. I've done a little audit and didn't spot > anything amiss. Furthermore the runtime pm setup already clears > irqs_disabled _before_ calling these two hooks. > > This regression has been introduced in > > commit ed2e6df18935beb3d63613c50103bf9757b2aa85 > Author: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri Jun 20 09:39:36 2014 -0700 > > drm/i915: clear pm._irqs_disabled field after installing IRQs > > Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Tested-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> Well it doesn't break gm45 at least, which is my fear every time the interrupt gets touched inside modeset_init. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
