We will want to park GEM before disengaging the drive^W^W^W unwedging.
Since we already do the work for idling, expose the guts as a new
function that we can then reuse.

v2: Just skip if already parked; makes it more forgiving to use by
future callers.

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdec...@intel.com>
Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kam...@intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuopp...@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuopp...@linux.intel.com>
---
Even with the follow up patch on hold, I think this will be useful when
we figure out the right order of operations in reset and stands by itself
as an improvement.

Any objections to pushing this by itself?
-Chris
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 9650a7b10c5f..134529598a84 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -136,6 +136,46 @@ int i915_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct drm_device *dev)
        return 0;
 }
 
+static u32 i915_gem_park(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
+{
+       lockdep_assert_held(&i915->drm.struct_mutex);
+       GEM_BUG_ON(i915->gt.active_requests);
+
+       if (!i915->gt.awake)
+               return I915_EPOCH_INVALID;
+
+       GEM_BUG_ON(i915->gt.epoch == I915_EPOCH_INVALID);
+
+       /*
+        * Be paranoid and flush a concurrent interrupt to make sure
+        * we don't reactivate any irq tasklets after parking.
+        *
+        * FIXME: Note that even though we have waited for execlists to be idle,
+        * there may still be an in-flight interrupt even though the CSB
+        * is now empty. synchronize_irq() makes sure that a residual interrupt
+        * is completed before we continue, but it doesn't prevent the HW from
+        * raising a spurious interrupt later. To complete the shield we should
+        * coordinate disabling the CS irq with flushing the interrupts.
+        */
+       synchronize_irq(i915->drm.irq);
+
+       intel_engines_park(i915);
+       i915_gem_timelines_park(i915);
+
+       i915_pmu_gt_parked(i915);
+
+       i915->gt.awake = false;
+
+       if (INTEL_GEN(i915) >= 6)
+               gen6_rps_idle(i915);
+
+       intel_display_power_put(i915, POWER_DOMAIN_GT_IRQ);
+
+       intel_runtime_pm_put(i915);
+
+       return i915->gt.epoch;
+}
+
 int
 i915_gem_get_aperture_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
                            struct drm_file *file)
@@ -3496,36 +3536,9 @@ i915_gem_idle_work_handler(struct work_struct *work)
        if (new_requests_since_last_retire(dev_priv))
                goto out_unlock;
 
-       /*
-        * Be paranoid and flush a concurrent interrupt to make sure
-        * we don't reactivate any irq tasklets after parking.
-        *
-        * FIXME: Note that even though we have waited for execlists to be idle,
-        * there may still be an in-flight interrupt even though the CSB
-        * is now empty. synchronize_irq() makes sure that a residual interrupt
-        * is completed before we continue, but it doesn't prevent the HW from
-        * raising a spurious interrupt later. To complete the shield we should
-        * coordinate disabling the CS irq with flushing the interrupts.
-        */
-       synchronize_irq(dev_priv->drm.irq);
-
-       intel_engines_park(dev_priv);
-       i915_gem_timelines_park(dev_priv);
+       epoch = i915_gem_park(dev_priv);
 
-       i915_pmu_gt_parked(dev_priv);
-
-       GEM_BUG_ON(!dev_priv->gt.awake);
-       dev_priv->gt.awake = false;
-       epoch = dev_priv->gt.epoch;
-       GEM_BUG_ON(epoch == I915_EPOCH_INVALID);
        rearm_hangcheck = false;
-
-       if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 6)
-               gen6_rps_idle(dev_priv);
-
-       intel_display_power_put(dev_priv, POWER_DOMAIN_GT_IRQ);
-
-       intel_runtime_pm_put(dev_priv);
 out_unlock:
        mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
 
-- 
2.17.0

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

Reply via email to