[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: Only sanitize GEM from late suspend
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Thu May 31 15:09:15 UTC 2018
On 31/05/2018 09:22, Chris Wilson wrote:
> During testing we encounter a conflict between SUSPEND_TEST_DEVICES and
> disabling reset (gem_eio/suspend). This results in the device continuing
> on without being reset, but since it has gone through HW sanitization to
> account for the suspend/resume cycle, we have to assume the device has
> been reset to its defaults. A simple way around this is to skip the
> sanitize phase for SUSPEND_TEST_DEVICES by moving it to suspend-late.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 6 +++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 22 +++++++++++++---------
> 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> index 8f002ae22e62..0d9b8cc0436d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> @@ -636,6 +636,8 @@ static const struct vga_switcheroo_client_ops i915_switcheroo_ops = {
>
> static void i915_gem_fini(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> {
> + i915_gem_suspend_late(dev_priv);
> +
> /* Flush any outstanding unpin_work. */
> i915_gem_drain_workqueue(dev_priv);
>
> @@ -1611,7 +1613,6 @@ static int i915_drm_suspend(struct drm_device *dev)
> opregion_target_state = suspend_to_idle(dev_priv) ? PCI_D1 : PCI_D3cold;
> intel_opregion_notify_adapter(dev_priv, opregion_target_state);
>
> - intel_uncore_suspend(dev_priv);
> intel_opregion_unregister(dev_priv);
>
> intel_fbdev_set_suspend(dev, FBINFO_STATE_SUSPENDED, true);
> @@ -1633,7 +1634,10 @@ static int i915_drm_suspend_late(struct drm_device *dev, bool hibernation)
>
> disable_rpm_wakeref_asserts(dev_priv);
>
> + i915_gem_suspend_late(dev_priv);
> +
> intel_display_set_init_power(dev_priv, false);
> + intel_uncore_suspend(dev_priv);
>
> /*
> * In case of firmware assisted context save/restore don't manually
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> index 32a65de7222d..38157df6ff5c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> @@ -3169,6 +3169,7 @@ void i915_gem_cleanup_engines(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> int i915_gem_wait_for_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> unsigned int flags);
> int __must_check i915_gem_suspend(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> +void i915_gem_suspend_late(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> void i915_gem_resume(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> int i915_gem_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf);
> int i915_gem_object_wait(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index 9b8fa1866cc9..f5c4ef052001 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -5055,6 +5055,17 @@ int i915_gem_suspend(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> if (WARN_ON(!intel_engines_are_idle(dev_priv)))
> i915_gem_set_wedged(dev_priv); /* no hope, discard everything */
>
> + intel_runtime_pm_put(dev_priv);
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_unlock:
> + mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
> + intel_runtime_pm_put(dev_priv);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +void i915_gem_suspend_late(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> +{
> /*
> * Neither the BIOS, ourselves or any other kernel
> * expects the system to be in execlists mode on startup,
> @@ -5074,16 +5085,9 @@ int i915_gem_suspend(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> * machines is a good idea, we don't - just in case it leaves the
> * machine in an unusable condition.
> */
> - intel_uc_sanitize(dev_priv);
> - i915_gem_sanitize(dev_priv);
>
> - intel_runtime_pm_put(dev_priv);
> - return 0;
> -
> -err_unlock:
> - mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
> - intel_runtime_pm_put(dev_priv);
> - return ret;
> + intel_uc_sanitize(i915);
> + i915_gem_sanitize(i915);
> }
>
> void i915_gem_resume(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>
It's hackery for PM core not suspending devices fully in device test
mode, but I have no better ideas, nor can I figure out why PM core does
it like that:
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list