[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/23] drm/i915: add forcewake functions that don't touch runtime PM

[Chris Wilson]

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 04:38:28PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> Another thing worth mentioning, is that at hsw_restore_lcpll we expect
> the forcewake count to be always zero. So we could do some other kind
> of trick relying on that, but I don't think it's very future-proof.

Actually, having read how these new functions were used, I have further
doubts that they are being used correctly. I think adding comments to
the callsites should answer most of my questions, or help show the
weakness in the current code.
 
> 2014-02-28 5:44 GMT-03:00 Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>:
> > The workqueue doesn't touch rpm here, so there routines could be
> > simplified if they remain in intel_uncore.c.
> 
> I don't understand what you mean with the sentence above. Could you
> please clarify?

I was reading the patches out of order, so hadn't seen the addition of
the rpm into the workqueue.
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre