Re: [PATCH 05/17] drm/i915/gem: Make caps.scheduler static

From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/17] drm/i915/gem: Make caps.scheduler static
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 20:08:31 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190805170831.GB19007@intel.intel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190730133035.1977-6-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>

Hi Chris,

>  /**
> - * i915_gem_shrinker_register - Register the i915 shrinker
> + * i915_gem_driver_register__shrinker - Register the i915 shrinker
>   * @i915: i915 device
>   *
>   * This function registers and sets up the i915 shrinker and OOM handler.
>   */
> -void i915_gem_shrinker_register(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> +void i915_gem_driver_register__shrinker(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>  {
>  	i915->mm.shrinker.scan_objects = i915_gem_shrinker_scan;
>  	i915->mm.shrinker.count_objects = i915_gem_shrinker_count;
> @@ -486,7 +486,7 @@ void i915_gem_shrinker_register(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>   *
>   * This function unregisters the i915 shrinker and OOM handler.
>   */
> -void i915_gem_shrinker_unregister(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> +void i915_gem_driver_unregister__shrinker(struct drm_i915_private *i915)

what is the reason for the renaming? Can this land in a different
patch?

>  {
>  	WARN_ON(unregister_vmap_purge_notifier(&i915->mm.vmap_notifier));
>  	WARN_ON(unregister_oom_notifier(&i915->mm.oom_notifier));
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c
> index 01857c12f12f..50aa7e95124d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c
> @@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ static bool assert_mmap_offset(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>  
>  static void disable_retire_worker(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>  {
> -	i915_gem_shrinker_unregister(i915);
> +	i915_gem_driver_unregister__shrinker(i915);
>  
>  	intel_gt_pm_get(&i915->gt);
>  
> @@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ static void restore_retire_worker(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>  	igt_flush_test(i915, I915_WAIT_LOCKED);
>  	mutex_unlock(&i915->drm.struct_mutex);
>  
> -	i915_gem_shrinker_register(i915);
> +	i915_gem_driver_register__shrinker(i915);
>  }
>  
>  static void mmap_offset_lock(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c
> index 98c071fe532b..cdba6cd29327 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c
> @@ -757,11 +757,8 @@ static void __intel_gt_set_wedged(struct intel_gt *gt)
>  	if (!INTEL_INFO(gt->i915)->gpu_reset_clobbers_display)
>  		__intel_gt_reset(gt, ALL_ENGINES);
>  
> -	for_each_engine(engine, gt->i915, id) {
> +	for_each_engine(engine, gt->i915, id)
>  		engine->submit_request = nop_submit_request;
> -		engine->schedule = NULL;
> -	}
> -	gt->i915->caps.scheduler = 0;

Maybe I haven't understood the patch, but is this the only part
described in the commit log?

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index 65863e955f40..9b10b879a37f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -1255,8 +1255,6 @@ int i915_gem_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>  
>  	intel_mocs_init_l3cc_table(gt);
>  
> -	intel_engines_set_scheduler_caps(i915);
> -

Is this really necessary necessary in this patch... can this also
go in a different patch?

Andi
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx