[v3 1/2] drm/xe: Add a new memory directory under tile
Riana Tauro
riana.tauro at intel.com
Mon Dec 11 09:53:21 UTC 2023
Hi Suja
On 12/8/2023 1:58 PM, Sundaresan, Sujaritha wrote:
>
> On 12/8/2023 10:33 AM, Upadhyay, Tejas wrote:
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Sundaresan, Sujaritha <sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 8:48 PM
>>> To: intel-xe at lists.freedesktop.org
>>> Cc: Upadhyay, Tejas <tejas.upadhyay at intel.com>; Tauro, Riana
>>> <riana.tauro at intel.com>; Gupta, Anshuman <anshuman.gupta at intel.com>;
>>> Sundaresan, Sujaritha <sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com>
>>> Subject: [v3 1/2] drm/xe: Add a new memory directory under tile
>>>
>>> Add a new memory directory under /device/tile<n> and move
>>> physical_vram_size attribute to the new directory.
>>>
>>> New hierarchy:
>>>
>>> /device/tile<n>/memory/physical_vram_size_bytes
>>>
>>> v2: Fix heading typo (Riana)
>>> Fix cleanup error on unload/reload cycle
>>>
>>> v3: Fix reload error with kobject_put in place
>>> of kobject_del (Tejas)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan at intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c
>>> index 16376607c68f..64be1f3a38a9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tile_sysfs.c
>>> @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ static ssize_t
>>> physical_vram_size_bytes_show(struct device *kdev, struct
>>> device_attribute
>>> *attr,
>>> char *buf)
>>> {
>>> - struct xe_tile *tile = kobj_to_tile(&kdev->kobj);
>>> + struct kobject *kobj = &kdev->kobj;
>>> + struct xe_tile *tile = kobj_to_tile(kobj->parent);
>> As Christmas is approaching, you might want to adjust this in
>> Christmas tree order.
>>
>>> return sysfs_emit(buf, "%llu\n",
>>> tile->mem.vram.actual_physical_size);
>>> }
>>> @@ -36,8 +37,10 @@ static const struct attribute
>>> *physical_memsize_attr =
>>>
>>> static void tile_sysfs_fini(struct drm_device *drm, void *arg) {
>>> - struct xe_tile *tile = arg;
>>> + struct kobject *kobj = arg;
>>> + struct xe_tile *tile = kobj_to_tile(kobj->parent);
>> Ditto
>>
>>> + kobject_put(kobj);
>>> kobject_put(tile->sysfs);
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -46,6 +49,7 @@ void xe_tile_sysfs_init(struct xe_tile *tile)
>>> struct xe_device *xe = tile_to_xe(tile);
>>> struct device *dev = xe->drm.dev;
>>> struct kobj_tile *kt;
>>> + struct kobject *kobj;
>>> int err;
>>>
>>> kt = kzalloc(sizeof(*kt), GFP_KERNEL); @@ -64,12 +68,17 @@ void
>>> xe_tile_sysfs_init(struct xe_tile *tile)
>>>
>>> tile->sysfs = &kt->base;
>>>
>>> - if (IS_DGFX(xe) && xe->info.platform != XE_DG1 &&
>>> - sysfs_create_file(tile->sysfs, physical_memsize_attr))
>>> + kobj = kobject_create_and_add("memory", tile->sysfs);
>>> + if (!kobj) {
>>> + drm_warn(&xe->drm, "%s failed, err: %d\n", __func__, -
>>> ENOMEM);
>>> + }
There will be an empty memory directory in case of igfx. Should the
memory directory be created only if there are attributes available?
Thanks
Riana
>> { } is not required here.
>>
>> Tejas
>
> Will fix all of the above.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Suja
>
>>> +
>>> + if (kobj && IS_DGFX(xe) && xe->info.platform != XE_DG1 &&
>>> + sysfs_create_file(kobj, physical_memsize_attr))
>>> drm_warn(&xe->drm,
>>> "Sysfs creation to read addr_range per tile failed\n");
>>>
>>> - err = drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, tile_sysfs_fini, tile);
>>> + err = drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, tile_sysfs_fini, kobj);
>>> if (err) {
>>> drm_warn(&xe->drm, "%s: drmm_add_action_or_reset
>>> failed, err: %d\n",
>>> __func__, err);
>>> --
>>> 2.25.1
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list