[PATCH 18/18] drm/i915/ddi: prefer read_poll_timeout() over readx_poll_timeout()
Ville Syrjälä
ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com
Fri Jun 27 15:40:35 UTC 2025
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 04:34:23PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2025, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 02:36:32PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> Unify on using read_poll_timeout() throughout instead of mixing with
> >> readx_poll_timeout(). While the latter can be ever so slightly simpler,
> >> they are both complicated enough that it's better to unify on one
> >> approach only.
> >>
> >> While at it, better separate the handling of error returns from
> >> drm_dp_dpcd_readb() and the actual status byte. This is best achieved by
> >> inlining the read_fec_detected_status() function.
> >>
> >> Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c | 33 +++++++++---------------
> >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> >> index 0405396c7750..fc4587311607 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> >> @@ -2339,34 +2339,25 @@ static void intel_dp_sink_set_fec_ready(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> >> drm_dbg_kms(display->drm, "Failed to clear FEC detected flags\n");
> >> }
> >>
> >> -static int read_fec_detected_status(struct drm_dp_aux *aux)
> >> -{
> >> - int ret;
> >> - u8 status;
> >> -
> >> - ret = drm_dp_dpcd_readb(aux, DP_FEC_STATUS, &status);
> >> - if (ret < 0)
> >> - return ret;
> >> -
> >> - return status;
> >> -}
> >> -
> >> static int wait_for_fec_detected(struct drm_dp_aux *aux, bool enabled)
> >> {
> >> struct intel_display *display = to_intel_display(aux->drm_dev);
> >> int mask = enabled ? DP_FEC_DECODE_EN_DETECTED : DP_FEC_DECODE_DIS_DETECTED;
> >> - int status;
> >> - int err;
> >> + u8 status = 0;
> >> + int ret, err;
> >>
> >> - err = readx_poll_timeout(read_fec_detected_status, aux, status,
> >> - status & mask || status < 0,
> >> - 10000, 200000);
> >> + ret = read_poll_timeout(drm_dp_dpcd_readb, err,
> >> + err || (status & mask),
> >> + 10 * 1000, 200 * 1000, false,
> >> + aux, DP_FEC_STATUS, &status);
> >
> > I think I hate these macros. It's very hard to tell from this
> > soup what is actually being done here.
>
> The thing is, I hate __wait_for(), wait_for(), wait_for_us(),
> wait_for_atomic_us(), and wait_for_atomic() even more.
>
> It's also very hard to figure out what is actually going on with
> them. The timeouts are arbitrarily either ms or us. wait_for_us() is
> atomic depending on the timeout. __wait_for() Wmax parameter actually
> isn't the max sleep, it's 2*Wmax-2. Some of them have exponentially
> growing sleeps, while some arbitrarily don't.
>
> It's a fscking mess, and people randomly choose whichever version with
> no idea what's actually going on behind the scenes.
>
> > The 'val', 'op', and 'args' look very disconnected here even though
> > they are always part of the same thing. Is there a reason they can't
> > just be a single 'op' parameter like we have in wait_for() so you can
> > actually see the code?
> >
> > Ie.
> > read_poll_timeout(err = drm_dp_dpcd_readb(aux, DP_FEC_STATUS, &status),
> > err || (status & mask),
> > 10 * 1000, 200 * 1000, false);
> > ?
>
> Internally the macro has:
>
> #define read_poll_timeout(op, val, cond, sleep_us, timeout_us, \
> sleep_before_read, args...) \
>
> ...
>
> (val) = op(args); \
>
> So you do need to provide an lvalue val, and you need to be able to add
> () after op. I think GCC allows not passing varargs. IOW you'd need to
> implement another macro (which could be used to implement the existing
> one, but not the other way round).
Just get rid of the 'args' and 'val' and it'll work just fine.
Then it'll be almost identical to wait_for() (basically just missing the
increasing backoff stuff).
AFAICS this thing was originally added just for reading a single
register and checking some bit/etc, so the name made some sense.
But now we're abusing it for all kinds of random things, so even
the name no longer makes that much sense.
So I think just something like this would work fine for us:
diff --git a/include/linux/iopoll.h b/include/linux/iopoll.h
index 91324c331a4b..9c38fd732028 100644
--- a/include/linux/iopoll.h
+++ b/include/linux/iopoll.h
@@ -14,27 +14,24 @@
#include <linux/io.h>
/**
- * read_poll_timeout - Periodically poll an address until a condition is
- * met or a timeout occurs
- * @op: accessor function (takes @args as its arguments)
- * @val: Variable to read the value into
- * @cond: Break condition (usually involving @val)
- * @sleep_us: Maximum time to sleep between reads in us (0 tight-loops). Please
- * read usleep_range() function description for details and
+ * poll_timeout - Periodically poll and perform an operaion until
+ * a condition is met or a timeout occurs
+ *
+ * @op: Operation
+ * @cond: Break condition
+ * @sleep_us: Maximum time to sleep between operations in us (0 tight-loops).
+ * Please read usleep_range() function description for details and
* limitations.
* @timeout_us: Timeout in us, 0 means never timeout
- * @sleep_before_read: if it is true, sleep @sleep_us before read.
- * @args: arguments for @op poll
+ * @sleep_before_read: if it is true, sleep @sleep_us before operation.
*
* When available, you'll probably want to use one of the specialized
* macros defined below rather than this macro directly.
*
- * Returns: 0 on success and -ETIMEDOUT upon a timeout. In either
- * case, the last read value at @args is stored in @val. Must not
+ * Returns: 0 on success and -ETIMEDOUT upon a timeout. Must not
* be called from atomic context if sleep_us or timeout_us are used.
*/
-#define read_poll_timeout(op, val, cond, sleep_us, timeout_us, \
- sleep_before_read, args...) \
+#define poll_timeout(op, cond, sleep_us, timeout_us, sleep_before_read) \
({ \
u64 __timeout_us = (timeout_us); \
unsigned long __sleep_us = (sleep_us); \
@@ -43,12 +40,12 @@
if (sleep_before_read && __sleep_us) \
usleep_range((__sleep_us >> 2) + 1, __sleep_us); \
for (;;) { \
- (val) = op(args); \
+ op; \
if (cond) \
break; \
if (__timeout_us && \
ktime_compare(ktime_get(), __timeout) > 0) { \
- (val) = op(args); \
+ op; \
break; \
} \
if (__sleep_us) \
@@ -58,6 +55,30 @@
(cond) ? 0 : -ETIMEDOUT; \
})
+/**
+ * read_poll_timeout - Periodically poll an address until a condition is
+ * met or a timeout occurs
+ * @op: accessor function (takes @args as its arguments)
+ * @val: Variable to read the value into
+ * @cond: Break condition (usually involving @val)
+ * @sleep_us: Maximum time to sleep between reads in us (0 tight-loops). Please
+ * read usleep_range() function description for details and
+ * limitations.
+ * @timeout_us: Timeout in us, 0 means never timeout
+ * @sleep_before_read: if it is true, sleep @sleep_us before read.
+ * @args: arguments for @op poll
+ *
+ * When available, you'll probably want to use one of the specialized
+ * macros defined below rather than this macro directly.
+ *
+ * Returns: 0 on success and -ETIMEDOUT upon a timeout. In either
+ * case, the last read value at @args is stored in @val. Must not
+ * be called from atomic context if sleep_us or timeout_us are used.
+ */
+#define read_poll_timeout(op, val, cond, sleep_us, timeout_us, \
+ sleep_before_read, args...) \
+ poll_timeout((val) = op(args), cond, sleep_us, timeout_us, sleep_before_read)
+
/**
* read_poll_timeout_atomic - Periodically poll an address until a condition is
* met or a timeout occurs
--
2.49.0
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list