[PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Drop the IRQ-off asserts

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Sebastian Andrzej Siewior (2019-09-26 11:56:44)
> The lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled() check is needless. The previous
> lockdep_assert_held() check ensures that the lock is acquired and while
> the lock is acquired lockdep also prints a warning if the interrupts are
> not disabled if they have to be.
> These IRQ-off asserts trigger on PREEMPT_RT because the locks become
> sleeping locks and do not really disable interrupts.

The intent was to document the entry points in were to be common
dma-fence functions where irqs were expected to be off. Similarly for
breadcrumbs to indicate that they were inner functions dealing with
irq-sensitive locks that the caller had to disable irqs for. lockdep is
not the clearest when it comes to explaining irq-inversions.

> Remove lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled().
> 
> Reported-by: Clark Williams <williams at redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy at linutronix.de>

Given the context though, they are moot.
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris