On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 06:40:19PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > There is no point in checking the refcount just after increasing it so > remove the assert from the get helper. Otoh, we should check the > refcount before decreasing it, so add it to the put helper. > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > index 64da5af..db63b8a 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > @@ -2132,7 +2132,6 @@ void intel_runtime_pm_get(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > pm_runtime_get_sync(device); > > atomic_inc(&dev_priv->pm.wakelock_count); > - assert_rpm_wakelock_held(dev_priv); Otoh, assert_device_not_suspended() still makes sense here. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
