On Thu, 2019-04-04 at 17:22 -0700, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > On Wed, 2019-04-03 at 16:35 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote: > > Even when driver is reloaded and hits this scenario the PSR mutex > > should be initialized, otherwise reading PSR debugfs status will > > execute mutex_lock() over a mutex that was not initialized. > > > > Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi > > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c > > index c80bb3003a7d..a84da931c3be 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c > > @@ -1227,7 +1227,6 @@ void intel_psr_init(struct drm_i915_private > > *dev_priv) > > if (val) { > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR interruption error set\n"); > > dev_priv->psr.sink_not_reliable = true; > Should we just sink_support = false and keep the return? IOW is there > any use > for sink_not_reliable? I guess it could cause confusion as user had PSR support before the module reload and after the load PSR debugfs will say that sink do not support PSR. > > > - return; > > } > > > > /* Set link_standby x link_off defaults */