On 2026. szeptember 8., kedd 9:41:48 közép-európai nyári idő Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > On 07/09/2026 21:33, Timur Kristóf wrote: > > This prepares the code for implementing recovery for SDMA 4.0. > > > > Reorganize the SDMA 4.0 code so that the functions that are > > responsible for managing the SDMA engines take an instance ID > > as an argument. > > > > This makes it possible to manage the SDMA instances > > independently of each other, which will enable us to > > also use these functions to implement resetting and > > recovering them independently. > > Radom patch to drop a comment on the whole series. It looks clean and > reasonable to me. Once the pre-requisite series is reviewed I can do a > more detail pass and slap an r-b to it.
Thanks! If we agree this is the right approach, I would like to do the same refactor for all the newer SDMA blocks as well for the sake of consistency. This refactor is necessary because I want to reuse the same functions for implementing per-instance SDMA soft reset (as opposed to duplicating a lot of code which seems to me to be more error-prone). > One discussion point could be is do we maybe want the prototype for all > to be "struct amdgpu_sdma_instance *" instead of "struct amdgpu_device, > const u32 instance_id"? I don't want to complicate this with the amdgpu_sdma_instance struct, because these functions only need the instance ID, and only for the purpose of knowing the register offset. > Could I also interest you in a related cleanup: > > https://lore.kernel.org/amd-gfx/20260622143649.54632-1-tvrtko.ursulin@igalia > .com/#t > > ? I've taken a quick look, I'd suggest a different approach to it. I will reply on your commits. Thanks & best regards, Timur
