[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 4/8] drm/i915/guc : Updating GuC logs to remove enable_guc_submission parameter

[Michal Wajdeczko]

On Sat, 11 Nov 2017 01:06:34 +0100, Sujaritha Sundaresan  
<sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com> wrote:

> Replacing conditions to remove dependance on enable_guc_submission

typo ;)

>
> v9: Including guc_log_level in the condition (Sagar)
>
> Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com>
> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko at intel.com>
> Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo at intel.com>
> Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c  
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c
> index 76d3eb1..4dbe5be 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c
> @@ -505,7 +505,7 @@ static void guc_flush_logs(struct intel_guc *guc)
>  {
>  	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
> -	if (!i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission ||
> +	if (!NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv) ||

Hmm, maybe in all these places we should rather check GuC firmware load
status directly? We don't care here why it was loaded, we just want to
verify that it is available.

>  	    (i915_modparams.guc_log_level < 0))
>  		return;
> @@ -646,7 +646,7 @@ int i915_guc_log_control(struct drm_i915_private  
> *dev_priv, u64 control_val)
> void i915_guc_log_register(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>  {
> -	if (!i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission ||
> +	if (!NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv) ||
>  	    (i915_modparams.guc_log_level < 0))
>  		return;
> @@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ void i915_guc_log_register(struct drm_i915_private  
> *dev_priv)
> void i915_guc_log_unregister(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>  {
> -	if (!i915_modparams.enable_guc_submission)
> +	if (!NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv))
>  		return;
> 	mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);