[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/uc: Fini hw even if GuC is not running

[Michal Wajdeczko]

On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 18:26:28 +0200, Fernando Pacheco  
<fernando.pacheco at intel.com> wrote:

> We should not be skipping uc_fini_hw on finding GuC
> is no longer running. There is plenty of hw and internal
> state that can be cleaned up without having to communicate
> with GuC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fernando Pacheco <fernando.pacheco at intel.com>
> Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio at intel.com>
> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c  
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> index 0dc2b0cf4604..c698cddc14dc 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> @@ -521,7 +521,7 @@ void intel_uc_fini_hw(struct intel_uc *uc)
>  {
>  	struct intel_guc *guc = &uc->guc;
> -	if (!intel_guc_is_running(guc))
> +	if (!intel_uc_supports_guc(uc))

there is a huge difference between is_running vs supports_guc
and choosing supports_guc is optimist approach as we can fail
to fetch guc fw and abort early, so maybe

	if (!intel_uc_fw_is_available(&guc->fw))

would be closer to reality (assuming we don't fail on wopcm
(hmm, maybe we should force fw state to FAIL in such case?)

>  		return;
> 	if (intel_uc_supports_guc_submission(uc))