* [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
@ 2017-03-09 15:52 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-09 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Intel-gfx
Cc: tursulin, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri, Praveen, Chris Wilson,
Daniel Vetter, Jani Nikula, intel-gfx, v4 . 10+
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
during suspend and resume if there were user held
forcewakes.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 13 ++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
index 2a3f35c30501..efa040847d69 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
@@ -302,22 +302,21 @@ static void intel_uncore_forcewake_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
WARN_ON(active_domains);
fw = dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active;
- if (fw)
- dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = 0;
fw_domains_reset(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
if (restore) { /* If reset with a user forcewake, try to restore */
- if (fw)
- dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = fw;
if (IS_GEN6(dev_priv) || IS_GEN7(dev_priv))
dev_priv->uncore.fifo_count =
fifo_free_entries(dev_priv);
- }
-
- if (!restore)
+ } else {
assert_forcewakes_inactive(dev_priv);
+ }
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->uncore.lock, irqflags);
}
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
@ 2017-03-09 15:52 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-09 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Intel-gfx; +Cc: intel-gfx, Paneri, Praveen, Daniel Vetter, v4 . 10+
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
during suspend and resume if there were user held
forcewakes.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 13 ++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
index 2a3f35c30501..efa040847d69 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
@@ -302,22 +302,21 @@ static void intel_uncore_forcewake_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
WARN_ON(active_domains);
fw = dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active;
- if (fw)
- dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = 0;
fw_domains_reset(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
if (restore) { /* If reset with a user forcewake, try to restore */
- if (fw)
- dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = fw;
if (IS_GEN6(dev_priv) || IS_GEN7(dev_priv))
dev_priv->uncore.fifo_count =
fifo_free_entries(dev_priv);
- }
-
- if (!restore)
+ } else {
assert_forcewakes_inactive(dev_priv);
+ }
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->uncore.lock, irqflags);
}
--
2.9.3
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-09 15:52 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
(?)
@ 2017-03-09 19:23 ` Patchwork
2017-03-09 20:48 ` Chris Wilson
-1 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2017-03-09 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/21004/
State : failure
== Summary ==
Series 21004v1 drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/21004/revisions/1/mbox/
Test core_auth:
Subgroup basic-auth:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test core_prop_blob:
Subgroup basic:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test drv_getparams_basic:
Subgroup basic-eu-total:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-subslice-total:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test drv_hangman:
Subgroup error-state-basic:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test drv_module_reload:
Subgroup basic-no-display:
pass -> FAIL (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-reload:
pass -> FAIL (fi-ilk-650) fdo#100045
Subgroup basic-reload-final:
pass -> FAIL (fi-ilk-650) fdo#100045
Test gem_basic:
Subgroup bad-close:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup create-close:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup create-fd-close:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test gem_busy:
Subgroup basic-busy-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-hang-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test gem_close_race:
Subgroup basic-process:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-threads:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test gem_cpu_reloc:
Subgroup basic:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test gem_cs_tlb:
Subgroup basic-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test gem_exec_basic:
Subgroup basic-bsd:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-render:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup gtt-bsd:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup gtt-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup gtt-render:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup readonly-bsd:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup readonly-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup readonly-render:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test gem_exec_create:
Subgroup basic:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test gem_exec_fence:
Subgroup await-hang-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-await-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-busy-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-wait-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup nb-await-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Test gem_exec_flush:
Subgroup basic-batch-kernel-default-uc:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
incomplete -> PASS (fi-skl-6700k) fdo#100130
Subgroup basic-batch-kernel-default-wb:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-uc-pro-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-uc-prw-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-uc-ro-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-uc-rw-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-uc-set-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
Subgroup basic-wb-pro-default:
pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
pass -> INCOMPLETE (fi-skl-6700hq)
Subgroup basic-wb-prw-default:
WARNING: Long output truncated
510c200742ced5a91d07e48220b669a3c9b30c0c drm-tip: 2017y-03m-09d-15h-21m-14s UTC integration manifest
b1962c6 drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
== Logs ==
For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/CI/Patchwork_4122/
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-09 19:23 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
@ 2017-03-09 20:48 ` Chris Wilson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2017-03-09 20:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 07:23:14PM -0000, Patchwork wrote:
> == Series Details ==
>
> Series: drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/21004/
> State : failure
>
> == Summary ==
>
> Series 21004v1 drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/21004/revisions/1/mbox/
>
> Test core_auth:
> Subgroup basic-auth:
> pass -> SKIP (fi-ilk-650)
[ 3.470450] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at (null)
[ 3.485921] IP: (null)
[ 3.489198] PGD 0
[ 3.492793] Oops: 0010 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
[ 3.496675] Modules linked in: i915(+) e1000e ptp pps_core prime_numbers
[ 3.503426] CPU: 1 PID: 194 Comm: systemd-udevd Not tainted 4.11.0-rc1-CI-Patchwork_4122+ #1
[ 3.511941] Hardware name: Hewlett-Packard HP Compaq 8100 Elite SFF PC/304Ah, BIOS 786H1 v01.13 07/14/2011
[ 3.521671] task: ffff88020961cbc0 task.stack: ffffc90000470000
[ 3.527634] RIP: 0010: (null)
[ 3.531427] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000473a60 EFLAGS: 00010046
[ 3.536696] RAX: 0000000000000282 RBX: ffff880205b70da8 RCX: ffff88020961d410
[ 3.543875] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffff880205b70000
[ 3.551057] RBP: ffffc90000473ab0 R08: 00000000d9242164 R09: 59311d7500000000
[ 3.558235] R10: ffffffff827ede60 R11: ffff88020961cbc0 R12: 0000000000000000
[ 3.565412] R13: ffff880205b70c58 R14: ffff880205b70000 R15: 0000000000000282
[ 3.572590] FS: 00007f34796fa8c0(0000) GS:ffff88021bc40000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 3.580757] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 3.586546] CR2: 0000000000000000 CR3: 0000000209753000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
[ 3.593723] Call Trace:
[ 3.596246] ? intel_uncore_forcewake_reset+0x110/0x260 [i915]
[ 3.602153] __intel_uncore_early_sanitize+0x55/0xb0 [i915]
[ 3.607801] intel_uncore_init+0x162/0x5e0 [i915]
[ 3.612577] i915_driver_load+0x5c5/0x1570 [i915]
[ 3.617330] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xe7/0x200
[ 3.622167] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10
[ 3.626247] i915_pci_probe+0x34/0xa0 [i915]
[ 3.630563] pci_device_probe+0x91/0x110
[ 3.634533] driver_probe_device+0x2ba/0x450
[ 3.638848] __driver_attach+0xde/0xe0
[ 3.642642] ? driver_probe_device+0x450/0x450
[ 3.647952] bus_for_each_dev+0x61/0xa0
[ 3.651836] driver_attach+0x19/0x20
[ 3.655457] bus_add_driver+0x1fb/0x270
[ 3.659337] ? 0xffffffffa01fc000
[ 3.662697] driver_register+0x5b/0xd0
[ 3.666490] ? 0xffffffffa01fc000
[ 3.669852] __pci_register_driver+0x5b/0x60
[ 3.674191] i915_init+0x6b/0x6e [i915]
[ 3.678076] do_one_initcall+0x3f/0x170
[ 3.681958] ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x75/0x80
[ 3.686710] ? kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x274/0x2e0
[ 3.691460] ? do_init_module+0x22/0x1f3
[ 3.695427] do_init_module+0x5a/0x1f3
[ 3.699221] load_module+0x2091/0x2410
[ 3.703015] ? symbol_put_addr+0x60/0x60
[ 3.706984] ? kernel_read_file+0x105/0x190
[ 3.711212] SyS_finit_module+0xbc/0xf0
[ 3.715094] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
ilk being the only !fw machine in the BAT set.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-09 15:52 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
(?)
(?)
@ 2017-03-09 21:12 ` Chris Wilson
2017-03-10 7:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
-1 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2017-03-09 21:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin
Cc: Intel-gfx, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri, Praveen, Daniel Vetter,
Jani Nikula, v4 . 10+
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 03:52:50PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>
> In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
> forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
> newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
>
> This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
> during suspend and resume if there were user held
> forcewakes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
> Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 13 ++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> index 2a3f35c30501..efa040847d69 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> @@ -302,22 +302,21 @@ static void intel_uncore_forcewake_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> WARN_ON(active_domains);
>
> fw = dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active;
> - if (fw)
> - dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
I see. On ilk-, funcs.force_wake_put/_get are NULL, so we need to keep
the if (fw) guard.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-09 21:12 ` [PATCH] " Chris Wilson
@ 2017-03-10 7:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-10 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Intel-gfx
Cc: tursulin, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri, Praveen, Chris Wilson,
Daniel Vetter, Jani Nikula, intel-gfx, v4 . 10+
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
during suspend and resume if there were user held
forcewakes.
v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
always present.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
index 2a3f35c30501..7efae77faca0 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
@@ -304,12 +304,14 @@ static void intel_uncore_forcewake_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
fw = dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active;
if (fw)
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = 0;
fw_domains_reset(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
if (restore) { /* If reset with a user forcewake, try to restore */
if (fw)
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = fw;
if (IS_GEN6(dev_priv) || IS_GEN7(dev_priv))
dev_priv->uncore.fifo_count =
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
@ 2017-03-10 7:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-10 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Intel-gfx; +Cc: intel-gfx, Paneri, Praveen, Daniel Vetter, v4 . 10+
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
during suspend and resume if there were user held
forcewakes.
v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
always present.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
index 2a3f35c30501..7efae77faca0 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
@@ -304,12 +304,14 @@ static void intel_uncore_forcewake_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
fw = dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active;
if (fw)
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = 0;
fw_domains_reset(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
if (restore) { /* If reset with a user forcewake, try to restore */
if (fw)
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw);
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = fw;
if (IS_GEN6(dev_priv) || IS_GEN7(dev_priv))
dev_priv->uncore.fifo_count =
--
2.9.3
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-10 7:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
(?)
@ 2017-03-10 8:50 ` Chris Wilson
2017-03-10 9:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
-1 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2017-03-10 8:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin
Cc: Intel-gfx, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri, Praveen, Daniel Vetter,
Jani Nikula, v4 . 10+
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 07:32:51AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>
> In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
> forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
> newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
>
> This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
> during suspend and resume if there were user held
> forcewakes.
>
> v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
> always present.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
> Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> index 2a3f35c30501..7efae77faca0 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
> @@ -304,12 +304,14 @@ static void intel_uncore_forcewake_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> fw = dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active;
> if (fw)
> dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
> + dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = 0;
Hmm, I think we would be happier with (think of a good name)
static void __intel_uncore_force_wake_get(i915, fw_domains)
{
i915->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(i915, fw_domains);
i915->uncore.funcs.fw_domains_active |= fw_domain;
}
static void __intel_uncore_force_wake_put(i915, fw_domains)
{
i915->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(i915, fw_domains);
i915->uncore.funcs.fw_domains_active &= ~fw_domain;
}
Another alternative would be to move the bitops down to the callbacks.
gcc might be happier, at the expense of some duplication and risk of
forgetting.
Anyway worth the effort?
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-10 8:50 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2017-03-10 9:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-10 9:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, Tvrtko Ursulin, Intel-gfx, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri,
Praveen, Daniel Vetter, Jani Nikula, v4 . 10+
On 10/03/2017 08:50, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 07:32:51AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>
>> In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
>> forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
>> newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
>>
>> This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
>> during suspend and resume if there were user held
>> forcewakes.
>>
>> v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
>> always present.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
>> Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>> index 2a3f35c30501..7efae77faca0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>> @@ -304,12 +304,14 @@ static void intel_uncore_forcewake_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>> fw = dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active;
>> if (fw)
>> dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
>> + dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = 0;
>
> Hmm, I think we would be happier with (think of a good name)
>
> static void __intel_uncore_force_wake_get(i915, fw_domains)
> {
> i915->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(i915, fw_domains);
> i915->uncore.funcs.fw_domains_active |= fw_domain;
> }
>
> static void __intel_uncore_force_wake_put(i915, fw_domains)
> {
> i915->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(i915, fw_domains);
> i915->uncore.funcs.fw_domains_active &= ~fw_domain;
> }
>
> Another alternative would be to move the bitops down to the callbacks.
> gcc might be happier, at the expense of some duplication and risk of
> forgetting.
>
> Anyway worth the effort?
Yes I agree, was considering the second option myself. Think I still
prefer that one to keep the inseparable together.
Regards,
Tvrtko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
@ 2017-03-10 9:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-10 9:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, Tvrtko Ursulin, Intel-gfx, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri,
Praveen, Daniel Vetter, Jani Nikula, v4 . 10+
On 10/03/2017 08:50, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 07:32:51AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>
>> In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
>> forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
>> newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
>>
>> This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
>> during suspend and resume if there were user held
>> forcewakes.
>>
>> v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
>> always present.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
>> Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>> index 2a3f35c30501..7efae77faca0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>> @@ -304,12 +304,14 @@ static void intel_uncore_forcewake_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>> fw = dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active;
>> if (fw)
>> dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, fw);
>> + dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active = 0;
>
> Hmm, I think we would be happier with (think of a good name)
>
> static void __intel_uncore_force_wake_get(i915, fw_domains)
> {
> i915->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(i915, fw_domains);
> i915->uncore.funcs.fw_domains_active |= fw_domain;
> }
>
> static void __intel_uncore_force_wake_put(i915, fw_domains)
> {
> i915->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(i915, fw_domains);
> i915->uncore.funcs.fw_domains_active &= ~fw_domain;
> }
>
> Another alternative would be to move the bitops down to the callbacks.
> gcc might be happier, at the expense of some duplication and risk of
> forgetting.
>
> Anyway worth the effort?
Yes I agree, was considering the second option myself. Think I still
prefer that one to keep the inseparable together.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking (rev2)
2017-03-09 15:52 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
(?)
@ 2017-03-10 9:22 ` Patchwork
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2017-03-10 9:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking (rev2)
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/21004/
State : success
== Summary ==
Series 21004v2 drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/21004/revisions/2/mbox/
Test gem_exec_suspend:
Subgroup basic-s4-devices:
pass -> DMESG-WARN (fi-bxt-t5700) fdo#100125
fdo#100125 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100125
fi-bdw-5557u total:278 pass:267 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:11 time: 461s
fi-bsw-n3050 total:278 pass:239 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:39 time: 605s
fi-bxt-j4205 total:278 pass:259 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:19 time: 538s
fi-bxt-t5700 total:278 pass:257 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20 time: 595s
fi-byt-j1900 total:278 pass:251 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time: 503s
fi-byt-n2820 total:278 pass:247 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:31 time: 510s
fi-hsw-4770 total:278 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:16 time: 449s
fi-hsw-4770r total:278 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:16 time: 435s
fi-ilk-650 total:278 pass:228 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:50 time: 438s
fi-ivb-3520m total:278 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:18 time: 500s
fi-ivb-3770 total:278 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:18 time: 498s
fi-kbl-7500u total:278 pass:259 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:18 time: 477s
fi-skl-6260u total:278 pass:268 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:10 time: 514s
fi-skl-6700hq total:278 pass:261 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:17 time: 606s
fi-skl-6700k total:278 pass:256 dwarn:4 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:18 time: 495s
fi-skl-6770hq total:278 pass:268 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:10 time: 563s
fi-snb-2520m total:278 pass:250 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:28 time: 553s
fi-snb-2600 total:278 pass:248 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:1 skip:29 time: 421s
48275556138fab369735c85ce5e3d6d6d6238f87 drm-tip: 2017y-03m-10d-07h-47m-54s UTC integration manifest
0039829 drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
== Logs ==
For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/CI/Patchwork_4130/
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-10 9:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2017-03-10 9:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-10 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Intel-gfx
Cc: tursulin, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri, Praveen, Chris Wilson,
Daniel Vetter, Jani Nikula, intel-gfx, v4 . 10+
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
during suspend and resume if there were user held
forcewakes.
v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
always present.
v3: Move bitmask tracking to get/put vfunc for simplicity.
(Chris Wilson)
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 13 ++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
index 2a3f35c30501..71b9b387ad04 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
@@ -120,6 +120,8 @@ fw_domains_get(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum forcewake_domains fw_doma
for_each_fw_domain_masked(d, fw_domains, dev_priv)
fw_domain_wait_ack(d);
+
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active |= fw_domains;
}
static void
@@ -131,6 +133,8 @@ fw_domains_put(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum forcewake_domains fw_doma
fw_domain_put(d);
fw_domain_posting_read(d);
}
+
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active &= ~fw_domains;
}
static void
@@ -248,10 +252,8 @@ intel_uncore_fw_release_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)
if (WARN_ON(domain->wake_count == 0))
domain->wake_count++;
- if (--domain->wake_count == 0) {
+ if (--domain->wake_count == 0)
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, domain->mask);
- dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active &= ~domain->mask;
- }
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->uncore.lock, irqflags);
@@ -470,10 +472,8 @@ static void __intel_uncore_forcewake_get(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
fw_domains &= ~domain->mask;
}
- if (fw_domains) {
+ if (fw_domains)
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw_domains);
- dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active |= fw_domains;
- }
}
/**
@@ -940,7 +940,6 @@ static noinline void ___force_wake_auto(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
fw_domain_arm_timer(domain);
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw_domains);
- dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active |= fw_domains;
}
static inline void __force_wake_auto(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
@ 2017-03-10 9:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-10 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Intel-gfx; +Cc: intel-gfx, Paneri, Praveen, Daniel Vetter, v4 . 10+
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
during suspend and resume if there were user held
forcewakes.
v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
always present.
v3: Move bitmask tracking to get/put vfunc for simplicity.
(Chris Wilson)
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 13 ++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
index 2a3f35c30501..71b9b387ad04 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
@@ -120,6 +120,8 @@ fw_domains_get(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum forcewake_domains fw_doma
for_each_fw_domain_masked(d, fw_domains, dev_priv)
fw_domain_wait_ack(d);
+
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active |= fw_domains;
}
static void
@@ -131,6 +133,8 @@ fw_domains_put(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum forcewake_domains fw_doma
fw_domain_put(d);
fw_domain_posting_read(d);
}
+
+ dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active &= ~fw_domains;
}
static void
@@ -248,10 +252,8 @@ intel_uncore_fw_release_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)
if (WARN_ON(domain->wake_count == 0))
domain->wake_count++;
- if (--domain->wake_count == 0) {
+ if (--domain->wake_count == 0)
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_put(dev_priv, domain->mask);
- dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active &= ~domain->mask;
- }
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->uncore.lock, irqflags);
@@ -470,10 +472,8 @@ static void __intel_uncore_forcewake_get(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
fw_domains &= ~domain->mask;
}
- if (fw_domains) {
+ if (fw_domains)
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw_domains);
- dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active |= fw_domains;
- }
}
/**
@@ -940,7 +940,6 @@ static noinline void ___force_wake_auto(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
fw_domain_arm_timer(domain);
dev_priv->uncore.funcs.force_wake_get(dev_priv, fw_domains);
- dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_active |= fw_domains;
}
static inline void __force_wake_auto(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
--
2.9.3
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking (rev4)
2017-03-09 15:52 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
(?)
@ 2017-03-10 10:47 ` Patchwork
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2017-03-10 10:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking (rev4)
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/21004/
State : success
== Summary ==
Series 21004v4 drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/21004/revisions/4/mbox/
fi-bdw-5557u total:278 pass:267 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:11 time: 466s
fi-bsw-n3050 total:278 pass:239 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:39 time: 611s
fi-bxt-j4205 total:278 pass:259 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:19 time: 539s
fi-bxt-t5700 total:278 pass:258 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20 time: 598s
fi-byt-j1900 total:278 pass:251 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time: 506s
fi-byt-n2820 total:278 pass:247 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:31 time: 497s
fi-hsw-4770 total:278 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:16 time: 438s
fi-hsw-4770r total:278 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:16 time: 432s
fi-ilk-650 total:278 pass:228 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:50 time: 445s
fi-ivb-3520m total:278 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:18 time: 505s
fi-ivb-3770 total:278 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:18 time: 493s
fi-kbl-7500u total:278 pass:259 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:18 time: 477s
fi-skl-6260u total:278 pass:268 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:10 time: 509s
fi-skl-6700hq total:278 pass:261 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:17 time: 594s
fi-skl-6700k total:278 pass:256 dwarn:4 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:18 time: 503s
fi-skl-6770hq total:278 pass:268 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:10 time: 554s
fi-snb-2520m total:278 pass:250 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:28 time: 555s
fi-snb-2600 total:278 pass:249 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:29 time: 434s
ac8ee658bd289a75ffb5d8aad3878a0394358a5b drm-tip: 2017y-03m-10d-09h-07m-40s UTC integration manifest
341ac06 drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
== Logs ==
For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/CI/Patchwork_4132/
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-10 9:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2017-03-10 10:54 ` Chris Wilson
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2017-03-10 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin
Cc: Intel-gfx, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri, Praveen, Daniel Vetter,
Jani Nikula, v4 . 10+
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 09:32:49AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>
> In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
> forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
> newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
>
> This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
> during suspend and resume if there were user held
> forcewakes.
>
> v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
> always present.
>
> v3: Move bitmask tracking to get/put vfunc for simplicity.
> (Chris Wilson)
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
> Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
After being a chicken and waiting for CI,
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
@ 2017-03-10 10:54 ` Chris Wilson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2017-03-10 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin; +Cc: Intel-gfx, v4 . 10+, Paneri, Praveen, Daniel Vetter
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 09:32:49AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>
> In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
> forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
> newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
>
> This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
> during suspend and resume if there were user held
> forcewakes.
>
> v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
> always present.
>
> v3: Move bitmask tracking to get/put vfunc for simplicity.
> (Chris Wilson)
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
> Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
After being a chicken and waiting for CI,
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
2017-03-10 10:54 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2017-03-10 11:51 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-10 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, Tvrtko Ursulin, Intel-gfx, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri,
Praveen, Daniel Vetter, Jani Nikula, v4 . 10+
On 10/03/2017 10:54, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 09:32:49AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>
>> In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
>> forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
>> newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
>>
>> This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
>> during suspend and resume if there were user held
>> forcewakes.
>>
>> v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
>> always present.
>>
>> v3: Move bitmask tracking to get/put vfunc for simplicity.
>> (Chris Wilson)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
>> Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
>
> After being a chicken and waiting for CI,
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
I know the feeling! Thanks, I also hope I haven't missed anything.
Pushed now.
Regards,
Tvrtko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking
@ 2017-03-10 11:51 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-03-10 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, Tvrtko Ursulin, Intel-gfx, Tvrtko Ursulin, Paneri,
Praveen, Daniel Vetter, Jani Nikula, v4 . 10+
On 10/03/2017 10:54, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 09:32:49AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>
>> In commit 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active
>> forcewake domains in a bitmask") I forgot to adjust the
>> newly introduce fw_domains_active state across reset.
>>
>> This caused the assert_forcewakes_inactive to trigger
>> during suspend and resume if there were user held
>> forcewakes.
>>
>> v2: Bitmask checks are required since vfuncs are not
>> always present.
>>
>> v3: Move bitmask tracking to get/put vfunc for simplicity.
>> (Chris Wilson)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Fixes: 003342a50021 ("drm/i915: Keep track of active forcewake domains in a bitmask")
>> Testcase: igt/drv_suspend/forcewake
>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> Cc: "Paneri, Praveen" <praveen.paneri@intel.com>
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: v4.10+ <stable@vger.kernel.org>
>
> After being a chicken and waiting for CI,
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
I know the feeling! Thanks, I also hope I haven't missed anything.
Pushed now.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-03-10 11:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-03-09 15:52 [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-09 15:52 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-09 19:23 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
2017-03-09 20:48 ` Chris Wilson
2017-03-09 21:12 ` [PATCH] " Chris Wilson
2017-03-10 7:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-10 7:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-10 8:50 ` Chris Wilson
2017-03-10 9:09 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-10 9:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-10 9:32 ` [PATCH v3] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-10 9:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-10 10:54 ` Chris Wilson
2017-03-10 10:54 ` Chris Wilson
2017-03-10 11:51 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-10 11:51 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-03-10 9:22 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking (rev2) Patchwork
2017-03-10 10:47 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Fix forcewake active domain tracking (rev4) Patchwork
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.