| Message ID | 1510358798-21566-2-git-send-email-sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Quoting Sujaritha Sundaresan (2017-11-11 00:06:31) > Unifying the various seq_puts messages in debugfs to the simplest one for > feature support. i.e. -ENODEV. -Chris
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017 01:06:31 +0100, Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> wrote: > Unifying the various seq_puts messages in debugfs to the simplest one for > feature support. > > v2: Clarifying the commit message (Anusha) > > v3: Re-factoring code as per review (Michal) > > v4: Rebase > > v5: Split from following patch > > v6: Re-factoring code (Michal, Sagar) > Clarifying commit message (Sagar) > > v7: Generalizing subject to drm/i915 (Sagar) > > v8: Omitting DRRS seq_puts unification (Michal) > > v9: Including the HAS_HUC condition (Michal) > Updating more functions with unified message (Sagar) > > Suggested by : Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> > Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com> > Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com> > Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@intel.com> > Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 53 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > <snip> > @@ -2361,8 +2361,10 @@ static int i915_huc_load_status_info(struct > seq_file *m, void *data) > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); > struct drm_printer p; > - if (!HAS_HUC_UCODE(dev_priv)) > + if (!HAS_HUC(dev_priv)) { Hmm, HAS_HUC is not available yet, it will be introduced by patch 2/8 <snip> > @@ -2461,9 +2465,11 @@ static bool check_guc_submission(struct seq_file > *m) > if (!guc->execbuf_client) { > seq_printf(m, "GuC submission %s\n", > - HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv) ? > - "disabled" : > - "not supported"); > + HAS_GUC(dev_priv) ? > + "not supported" : > + NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv) ? NEEDS_GUC_FW will also be introduced by patch 2/8 Michal
On 11/12/2017 08:18 AM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote: > On Sat, 11 Nov 2017 01:06:31 +0100, Sujaritha Sundaresan > <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> wrote: > >> Unifying the various seq_puts messages in debugfs to the simplest one >> for >> feature support. >> >> v2: Clarifying the commit message (Anusha) >> >> v3: Re-factoring code as per review (Michal) >> >> v4: Rebase >> >> v5: Split from following patch >> >> v6: Re-factoring code (Michal, Sagar) >> Clarifying commit message (Sagar) >> >> v7: Generalizing subject to drm/i915 (Sagar) >> >> v8: Omitting DRRS seq_puts unification (Michal) >> >> v9: Including the HAS_HUC condition (Michal) >> Updating more functions with unified message (Sagar) >> >> Suggested by : Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> >> Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com> >> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com> >> Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@intel.com> >> Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 53 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ >> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >> > > <snip> > >> @@ -2361,8 +2361,10 @@ static int i915_huc_load_status_info(struct >> seq_file *m, void *data) >> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); >> struct drm_printer p; >> - if (!HAS_HUC_UCODE(dev_priv)) >> + if (!HAS_HUC(dev_priv)) { > > Hmm, HAS_HUC is not available yet, it will be introduced by patch 2/8 > > <snip> > >> @@ -2461,9 +2465,11 @@ static bool check_guc_submission(struct >> seq_file *m) >> if (!guc->execbuf_client) { >> seq_printf(m, "GuC submission %s\n", >> - HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv) ? >> - "disabled" : >> - "not supported"); >> + HAS_GUC(dev_priv) ? >> + "not supported" : >> + NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv) ? > > NEEDS_GUC_FW will also be introduced by patch 2/8 > > Michal I will not make the macro changes in this patch. I will also move this patch out of the series, as Sagar had suggested in a review to a previous version, since there will be no dependence on any of the other changes. Thanks for the review :) Regards, Sujaritha
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c index add6af4..462e448 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c @@ -1641,7 +1641,7 @@ static int i915_fbc_status(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); if (!HAS_FBC(dev_priv)) { - seq_puts(m, "FBC unsupported on this chipset\n"); + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); return 0; } @@ -1809,7 +1809,7 @@ static int i915_ring_freq_table(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) unsigned int max_gpu_freq, min_gpu_freq; if (!HAS_LLC(dev_priv)) { - seq_puts(m, "unsupported on this chipset\n"); + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); return 0; } @@ -2361,8 +2361,10 @@ static int i915_huc_load_status_info(struct seq_file *m, void *data) struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); struct drm_printer p; - if (!HAS_HUC_UCODE(dev_priv)) + if (!HAS_HUC(dev_priv)) { + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); return 0; + } p = drm_seq_file_printer(m); intel_uc_fw_dump(&dev_priv->huc.fw, &p); @@ -2380,8 +2382,10 @@ static int i915_guc_load_status_info(struct seq_file *m, void *data) struct drm_printer p; u32 tmp, i; - if (!HAS_GUC_UCODE(dev_priv)) + if (!HAS_GUC(dev_priv)) { + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); return 0; + } p = drm_seq_file_printer(m); intel_uc_fw_dump(&dev_priv->guc.fw, &p); @@ -2461,9 +2465,11 @@ static bool check_guc_submission(struct seq_file *m) if (!guc->execbuf_client) { seq_printf(m, "GuC submission %s\n", - HAS_GUC_SCHED(dev_priv) ? - "disabled" : - "not supported"); + HAS_GUC(dev_priv) ? + "not supported" : + NEEDS_GUC_FW(dev_priv) ? + "disabled" : + "failed"); return false; } @@ -2652,7 +2658,7 @@ static int i915_edp_psr_status(struct seq_file *m, void *data) bool enabled = false; if (!HAS_PSR(dev_priv)) { - seq_puts(m, "PSR not supported\n"); + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); return 0; } @@ -2805,7 +2811,7 @@ static int i915_runtime_pm_status(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_priv->drm.pdev; if (!HAS_RUNTIME_PM(dev_priv)) - seq_puts(m, "Runtime power management not supported\n"); + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); seq_printf(m, "GPU idle: %s\n", yesno(!dev_priv->gt.awake)); seq_printf(m, "IRQs disabled: %s\n", @@ -3407,9 +3413,13 @@ static int i915_ipc_status_show(struct seq_file *m, void *data) static int i915_ipc_status_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) { struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = inode->i_private; + struct seq_file *m; - if (!HAS_IPC(dev_priv)) - return -ENODEV; + if (!HAS_IPC(dev_priv)) { + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); + return 0; + } + return single_open(file, i915_ipc_status_show, dev_priv); } @@ -3914,9 +3924,12 @@ static int cur_wm_latency_show(struct seq_file *m, void *data) static int pri_wm_latency_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) { struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = inode->i_private; + struct seq_file *m; - if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 5 && !IS_G4X(dev_priv)) - return -ENODEV; + if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 5 && !IS_G4X(dev_priv)) { + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); + return 0; + } return single_open(file, pri_wm_latency_show, dev_priv); } @@ -3924,9 +3937,12 @@ static int pri_wm_latency_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) static int spr_wm_latency_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) { struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = inode->i_private; + struct seq_file *m; - if (HAS_GMCH_DISPLAY(dev_priv)) - return -ENODEV; + if (HAS_GMCH_DISPLAY(dev_priv)) { + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); + return 0; + } return single_open(file, spr_wm_latency_show, dev_priv); } @@ -3934,9 +3950,12 @@ static int spr_wm_latency_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) static int cur_wm_latency_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) { struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = inode->i_private; + struct seq_file *m; - if (HAS_GMCH_DISPLAY(dev_priv)) - return -ENODEV; + if (HAS_GMCH_DISPLAY(dev_priv)) { + seq_puts(m, "not supported\n"); + return 0; + } return single_open(file, cur_wm_latency_show, dev_priv); }
Unifying the various seq_puts messages in debugfs to the simplest one for feature support. v2: Clarifying the commit message (Anusha) v3: Re-factoring code as per review (Michal) v4: Rebase v5: Split from following patch v6: Re-factoring code (Michal, Sagar) Clarifying commit message (Sagar) v7: Generalizing subject to drm/i915 (Sagar) v8: Omitting DRRS seq_puts unification (Michal) v9: Including the HAS_HUC condition (Michal) Updating more functions with unified message (Sagar) Suggested by : Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@intel.com> Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com> Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@intel.com> Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)