Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) 
to consider:
- [Low] Missing `fallthrough;` or `break;` annotation in switch case causes 
implicit fallthrough warning, which breaks the build.
--

commit e0b7d47d4c0056e301a2d2f6858efe90c7e7bb10
Author: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]>

drm/i915: Disable "busy" pmu event on CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT

The busyness implementation for guc is incompatible with PMU,
so disable it to prevent upsetting lockdep.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c
> index 1c3bafda9c708..bd7116732285f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_pmu.c
> @@ -554,6 +554,9 @@ engine_event_status(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
>  {
>       switch (sample) {
>       case I915_SAMPLE_BUSY:
> +             /* The guc submission engine->busyness() callback has issues 
> with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT */
> +             if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && 
> intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(&engine->gt->uc))
> +                     return -ENODEV;

[Severity: Low]
Will this trigger a -Wimplicit-fallthrough compiler warning? The case now
contains statements but does not explicitly terminate with a fallthrough;
annotation before the next case.

>       case I915_SAMPLE_WAIT:
>               break;
>       case I915_SAMPLE_SEMA:

-- 
Sashiko AI review ยท 
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=1

Reply via email to