[PATCH] drm/xe/pm: Restore display pm if there is error after display suspend

[Lin, Shuicheng]

On Wed, July 9, 2025 4:08 AM Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 09:11:41AM -0700, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 7/6/2025 6:58 PM, Shuicheng Lin wrote:
> > > xe_bo_evict_all() is called after xe_display_pm_suspend(). So if
> > > there is error with xe_bo_evict_all(), display pm should be restored.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 51462211f4a9 ("drm/xe/pxp: add PXP PM support")
> > > Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio at intel.com>
> > > Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Shuicheng Lin <shuicheng.lin at intel.com>
> >
> > If you look at 51462211f4a9, you'll see that before the PXP changes
> > were added xe_display_pm_resume was only called from the error path of
> > xe_gt_suspend (even though xe_bo_evict_all was already there), so I've
> > kept that behavior when I added the PXP changes.
> > That pre-PXP behavior is still present in the 6.12 LTS kernel, so if
> > that's wrong it needs to be fixed there as well.
> >
> > Looking at the history, it looks like the patch that moved the call to
> > xe_display_pm_resume to before the evict_all without adjusting the
> > error management was this one:
> > cb8f81c17531 ("drm/xe/display: Make display suspend/resume work on
> > discrete")
> >
> > Given how different the code is, I don't know if it is better to send
> > a separate patch for that to the stable tree, or to update the fixes
> > tag on this one and send the separate patch when it fails to apply.
> >
> > If you want to go with the former, this is:
> > Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio at intel.com>
> >
> > But please also get an ack from someone on the display side to make
> > sure this was not intentional.
> 
> not intentional. definitely a bug.
> 
> Instead of removing the fixes tag, I added an extra one. And pushed to drm-xe-
> next.
> 
> Shuicheng whenever you receive a notification that the patch failed to apply in
> some stable branch, please follow up sending a backported version directly to the
> stable mailing list.

Thanks Rodrigo. I will monitor the mail and send the patch if need.

Shuicheng

> 
> Thanks for the patch and review.
> 
> >
> > Daniele
> >
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c | 3 +--
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> > > index ff749edc005b..bcfda545e74f 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> > > @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ int xe_pm_suspend(struct xe_device *xe)
> > >   	/* FIXME: Super racey... */
> > >   	err = xe_bo_evict_all(xe);
> > >   	if (err)
> > > -		goto err_pxp;
> > > +		goto err_display;
> > >   	for_each_gt(gt, xe, id) {
> > >   		err = xe_gt_suspend(gt);
> > > @@ -151,7 +151,6 @@ int xe_pm_suspend(struct xe_device *xe)
> > >   err_display:
> > >   	xe_display_pm_resume(xe);
> > > -err_pxp:
> > >   	xe_pxp_pm_resume(xe->pxp);
> > >   err:
> > >   	drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "Device suspend failed %d\n", err);
> >