On Fri, 17 May 2019 18:31:31 +0200, Chris Wilson
<ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
Quoting Michal Wajdeczko (2019-05-17 17:22:25)
We may skip reset preparation steps if GuC is already sanitized.
Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdec...@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
index 86edfa5ad72e..36c53a42927c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.c
@@ -499,6 +499,9 @@ void intel_uc_reset_prepare(struct drm_i915_private
*i915)
if (!USES_GUC(i915))
return;
+ if (!intel_guc_is_alive(guc))
+ return;
Does it not replace "if (!USES_GUC(i915))"?
Yes it can, as we will never fetch/upload fw if we don't plan to use it ;)
Btw, I'm thinking of renaming intel_guc_is_alive to intel_guc_is_loaded
or intel_guc_is_started to better describe what this function is reporting,
as one can think that intel_guc_is_alive is actually checking that GuC fw
is responsive, which in general might not be the same as "loaded"
Michal
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
