[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 19/21] drm/i915: Move the get/put irq locking into the caller

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 08/06/16 12:10, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 11:18:59AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 08/06/16 11:01, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 01:46:53PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 03/06/16 17:08, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>>>> With only a single callsite for intel_engine_cs->irq_get and ->irq_put,
>>>>> we can reduce the code size by moving the common preamble into the
>>>>> caller, and we can also eliminate the reference counting.
>>>>>
>>>>> For completeness, as we are no longer doing reference counting on irq,
>>>>> rename the get/put vfunctions to enable/disable respectively.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c          |   8 +-
>>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_breadcrumbs.c |  10 +-
>>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c         |  34 +---
>>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c  | 269 ++++++++++---------------------
>>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.h  |   5 +-
>>>>>   5 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 218 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>>>> index 14b3d65bb604..5bdb433dde8c 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>>>> @@ -259,12 +259,12 @@ static void ilk_update_gt_irq(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>>>>>   	dev_priv->gt_irq_mask &= ~interrupt_mask;
>>>>>   	dev_priv->gt_irq_mask |= (~enabled_irq_mask & interrupt_mask);
>>>>>   	I915_WRITE(GTIMR, dev_priv->gt_irq_mask);
>>>>> -	POSTING_READ(GTIMR);
>>>>>   }
>>>>>
>>>>>   void gen5_enable_gt_irq(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, uint32_t mask)
>>>>>   {
>>>>>   	ilk_update_gt_irq(dev_priv, mask, mask);
>>>>> +	POSTING_READ_FW(GTIMR);
>>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>> Unrelated hunks?
>>>>
>>>> How is POSTING_READ_FW correct?
>>>
>>> The requirement here is an uncached read of the mmio register in order
>>> to flush the previous write to hw. A grander scheme would be to convert
>>> all posting reads, but that requires double checking to see if anyone
>>> has been cheating!
>>
>> So what prevents to force-wake for getting released between the
>> I915_WRITE and POSTING_READ_FW ?
>
> Nothing. The point is that the FW is not required for the correctness or
> operation of the POSTING_READ as a barrier to hardware enabling the
> interrupt.

So sleeping hardware is OK with being read from? It won't hang or 
anything, just provide bad data?

Why not change POSTING_READ to be I915_READ_FW always then?

Regards,

Tvrtko