| Message ID | 20240314141021.161009-2-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [01/11] drm/xe: Introduce xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume for inner callers | expand |
Hi, On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 10:10:12AM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > The i915-display will start using the intel_runtime_pm_noresume. > So we need to add the compat header before it. Or "So we need to add it to the compat header before"? > > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h > index fef969112b1d..ecaaef3df4bf 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h > @@ -176,6 +176,14 @@ static inline intel_wakeref_t intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use(struct xe_runtime_p > return xe_pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(xe); > } > > +static inline intel_wakeref_t intel_runtime_pm_get_noresume(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm) > +{ > + struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device, runtime_pm); > + > + xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume(xe); > + return true; > +} > + LGTM but wondering if this and the next patch in the series should be combined in order to have at least one use of this new definition. Either way: Reviewed-by: Francois Dugast <francois.dugast@intel.com> Francois > static inline void intel_runtime_pm_put_unchecked(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm) > { > struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device, runtime_pm); > -- > 2.44.0 >
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 07:04:02PM +0100, Francois Dugast wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 10:10:12AM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > The i915-display will start using the intel_runtime_pm_noresume. > > So we need to add the compat header before it. > > Or "So we need to add it to the compat header before"? > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h | 8 ++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h > > index fef969112b1d..ecaaef3df4bf 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h > > @@ -176,6 +176,14 @@ static inline intel_wakeref_t intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use(struct xe_runtime_p > > return xe_pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(xe); > > } > > > > +static inline intel_wakeref_t intel_runtime_pm_get_noresume(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm) > > +{ > > + struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device, runtime_pm); > > + > > + xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume(xe); > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > LGTM but wondering if this and the next patch in the series should be > combined in order to have at least one use of this new definition. I preferred to keep separate because they are in different drivers and because the compilation doesn't break without the user here. (I just double checked that). > > Either way: > Reviewed-by: Francois Dugast <francois.dugast@intel.com> > > Francois > > > static inline void intel_runtime_pm_put_unchecked(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm) > > { > > struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device, runtime_pm); > > -- > > 2.44.0 > >
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h index fef969112b1d..ecaaef3df4bf 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h @@ -176,6 +176,14 @@ static inline intel_wakeref_t intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use(struct xe_runtime_p return xe_pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(xe); } +static inline intel_wakeref_t intel_runtime_pm_get_noresume(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm) +{ + struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device, runtime_pm); + + xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume(xe); + return true; +} + static inline void intel_runtime_pm_put_unchecked(struct xe_runtime_pm *pm) { struct xe_device *xe = container_of(pm, struct xe_device, runtime_pm);
The i915-display will start using the intel_runtime_pm_noresume. So we need to add the compat header before it. Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/xe/compat-i915-headers/i915_drv.h | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)