[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/5] drm/i915: un-inline i915_gem_drain_workqueue()

[Jani Nikula]

i915_gem_drain_workqueue() is not used on any hot paths. Un-unline it.

Replace the do-while with a for loop while at it.

Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 22 +---------------------
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
index 54898faa9b72..911164dae182 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
@@ -992,27 +992,7 @@ static inline void i915_gem_drain_freed_objects(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
 	}
 }
 
-static inline void i915_gem_drain_workqueue(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
-{
-	/*
-	 * Similar to objects above (see i915_gem_drain_freed-objects), in
-	 * general we have workers that are armed by RCU and then rearm
-	 * themselves in their callbacks. To be paranoid, we need to
-	 * drain the workqueue a second time after waiting for the RCU
-	 * grace period so that we catch work queued via RCU from the first
-	 * pass. As neither drain_workqueue() nor flush_workqueue() report
-	 * a result, we make an assumption that we only don't require more
-	 * than 3 passes to catch all _recursive_ RCU delayed work.
-	 *
-	 */
-	int pass = 3;
-	do {
-		flush_workqueue(i915->wq);
-		rcu_barrier();
-		i915_gem_drain_freed_objects(i915);
-	} while (--pass);
-	drain_workqueue(i915->wq);
-}
+void i915_gem_drain_workqueue(struct drm_i915_private *i915);
 
 struct i915_vma * __must_check
 i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin_ww(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 c2d6172ba4bb..4c89b33ada95 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -1085,6 +1085,28 @@ i915_gem_madvise_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 	return err;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Similar to objects above (see i915_gem_drain_freed-objects), in general we
+ * have workers that are armed by RCU and then rearm themselves in their
+ * callbacks. To be paranoid, we need to drain the workqueue a second time after
+ * waiting for the RCU grace period so that we catch work queued via RCU from
+ * the first pass. As neither drain_workqueue() nor flush_workqueue() report a
+ * result, we make an assumption that we only don't require more than 3 passes
+ * to catch all _recursive_ RCU delayed work.
+ */
+void i915_gem_drain_workqueue(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
+		flush_workqueue(i915->wq);
+		rcu_barrier();
+		i915_gem_drain_freed_objects(i915);
+	}
+
+	drain_workqueue(i915->wq);
+}
+
 int i915_gem_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
 {
 	int ret;
-- 
2.34.1