[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/5] drm/i915: Stop second guessing the caller for intel_uncore_wait_for_register()
Michal Wajdeczko
michal.wajdeczko at intel.com
Tue Apr 11 10:30:25 UTC 2017
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 11:13:36AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Allow the caller to use the fast_timeout_us to specify how long to wait
> within the atomic section, rather than transparently switching to a
> sleeping loop for larger values. This is required as some callsites may
> need a long wait and are in an atomic section.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko at intel.com>
> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> index eb38392a2435..53c8457869f6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> @@ -1601,7 +1601,7 @@ static int gen6_reset_engines(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> *
> * Otherwise, the wait will timeout after @slow_timeout_ms milliseconds.
> * For atomic context @slow_timeout_ms must be zero and @fast_timeout_us
> - * must be not larger than 10 microseconds.
> + * must be not larger than 20,0000 microseconds.
> *
> * Note that this routine assumes the caller holds forcewake asserted, it is
> * not suitable for very long waits. See intel_wait_for_register() if you
> @@ -1623,16 +1623,17 @@ int __intel_wait_for_register_fw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> int ret;
>
> /* Catch any overuse of this function */
> - might_sleep_if(fast_timeout_us > 10 || slow_timeout_ms);
> + might_sleep_if(slow_timeout_ms);
>
> - if (fast_timeout_us > 10)
> - ret = _wait_for(done, fast_timeout_us, 10);
> - else
> + ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> + if (fast_timeout_us && fast_timeout_us < 20000)
I still think that we should not try to silently drop fast timeouts longer than 20ms.
Maybe at least -EINVAL or GEM_WARN or something ?
-Michal
> ret = _wait_for_atomic(done, fast_timeout_us, 0);
> if (ret)
> ret = wait_for(done, slow_timeout_ms);
> +
> if (out_value)
> *out_value = reg_value;
> +
> return ret;
> #undef done
> }
> --
> 2.11.0
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list