Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 1 Aug 2022 20:02:41 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 1/8] drm/msm: Remove unnecessary pm_runtime_get/put | From | Akhil P Oommen <> |
| |
On 7/31/2022 9:25 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 2:41 AM Akhil P Oommen <quic_akhilpo@quicinc.com> wrote: >> We already enable gpu power from msm_gpu_submit(), so avoid a duplicate >> pm_runtime_get/put from msm_job_run(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Akhil P Oommen <quic_akhilpo@quicinc.com> >> --- >> >> (no changes since v1) >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_ringbuffer.c | 4 ---- >> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_ringbuffer.c >> index 56eecb4..cad4c35 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_ringbuffer.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_ringbuffer.c >> @@ -29,8 +29,6 @@ static struct dma_fence *msm_job_run(struct drm_sched_job *job) >> msm_gem_unlock(obj); >> } >> >> - pm_runtime_get_sync(&gpu->pdev->dev); >> - > This is removing a _get_sync() and simply relying on a _get() (async) > in msm_gpu_submit().. that seems pretty likely to go badly? I think > it should probably replace the _get() in msm_gpu_submit() with > _get_sync() (but also since this is changing position of > resume/suspend vs active_lock, please make sure you test with lockdep > enabled) > > BR, > -R As discussed in the other patch, this is correctly handled in msm_gpu_submit(). And from active_lock perspective, there is no change actually. GPU is ON by the time we touch active_lock in both cases.
-Akhil. >> /* TODO move submit path over to using a per-ring lock.. */ >> mutex_lock(&gpu->lock); >> >> @@ -38,8 +36,6 @@ static struct dma_fence *msm_job_run(struct drm_sched_job *job) >> >> mutex_unlock(&gpu->lock); >> >> - pm_runtime_put(&gpu->pdev->dev); >> - >> return dma_fence_get(submit->hw_fence); >> } >> >> -- >> 2.7.4 >>
| |