[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YhSwhdr96qnka4yx@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 11:44:37 +0200
From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Chris Wilson <chris.p.wilson@...el.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 08/11] drm/i915: Separate wakeref tracking
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:28:33AM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>
>
> On 22.02.2022 08:12, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 12:25:39AM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> >> -static noinline depot_stack_handle_t
> >> +static intel_wakeref_t
> >> track_intel_runtime_pm_wakeref(struct intel_runtime_pm *rpm)
> >> {
> >> - depot_stack_handle_t stack, *stacks;
> >> - unsigned long flags;
> >> -
> >> - if (rpm->no_wakeref_tracking)
> >> - return -1;
> >> -
> >> - stack = __save_depot_stack();
> >> - if (!stack)
> >> + if (!rpm->available)
> >> return -1;
> > Still not the same.
> >
>
> It was fixed but in wrong place - patch 11. I will move the change here.
Doesn't look correct there either.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists