From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45B70C4320A for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:17:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E97361102 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:17:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240824AbhHTOSH (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 10:18:07 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:41193 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235032AbhHTOSF (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 10:18:05 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 13C3E6736F; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 16:17:25 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 16:17:24 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Zhenyu Wang Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jason Gunthorpe , "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" , Greg KH , "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" , Joonas Lahtinen , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jani Nikula , Gerd Hoffmann , "Vivi, Rodrigo" , "intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org" , "Wang, Zhi A" , Jani Nikula , Luis Chamberlain Subject: Re: refactor the i915 GVT support Message-ID: <20210820141724.GA29034@lst.de> References: <20210728175925.GU1721383@nvidia.com> <20210729072022.GB31896@lst.de> <20210803094315.GF13928@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com> <20210803143058.GA1721383@nvidia.com> <20210804052606.GG13928@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com> <20210816173458.GA9183@lst.de> <20210817010851.GW13928@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com> <20210817052203.GX13928@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com> <20210819082929.GB13928@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210819082929.GB13928@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 04:29:29PM +0800, Zhenyu Wang wrote: > I'm working on below patch to resolve this. But I met a weird issue in > case when building i915 as module and also kvmgt module, it caused > busy wait on request_module("kvmgt") when boot, it doesn't happen if > building i915 into kernel. I'm not sure what could be the reason? Luis, do you know if there is a problem with a request_module from a driver ->probe routine that is probably called by a module_init function itself? In the meantime I'll try to reproduce it locally, but I always had a hard time getting useful results out of a modular i915, especially when combined with module paramters. (no blame on i915, just the problem with modules needed early on). > > > But the problem I see is that after moving gvt device model (gvt/*.c > > except kvmgt.c) into kvmgt module, we'll have issue with initial mmio > > state which current gvt relies on, that is in design supposed to get > > initial HW state before i915 driver has taken any operation. Before > > we can ensure that, I think we may only remove MPT part first but > > still keep gvt device model as part of i915 with config. I'll try to > > split that out. > > Sorry I misread the code that as we always request kvmgt module when > gvt init, so it should still apply original method that this isn't a > problem. Our current validation result has shown no regression as well. What does initial mmio state mean? This is something new to me. But as you said in this mail unless I missed something very big it should work the same as before. > -static inline void intel_context_unpin(struct intel_context *ce) > +static inline void _intel_context_unpin(struct intel_context *ce) > { > if (!ce->ops->sched_disable) { > __intel_context_do_unpin(ce, 1); > @@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ static inline void intel_context_unpin(struct intel_context *ce) > } > } > } > +void intel_context_unpin(struct intel_context *ce); Looking at intel_context_unpin/_intel_context_unpin is there really a need to have this inline to start with? It don't see much the compiler could optimize by inlining it.