On 29/04/2021 18:31, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 07:31:43PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 09:35:29AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
__i915_active_call annotation is required on the retire callback to ensure
correct function alignment.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Fixes: a21ce8ad12d2 ("drm/i915/overlay: Switch to using i915_active tracking")
Cc: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.a...@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_overlay.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_overlay.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_overlay.c
index fffbde4256db..428819ba18dd 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_overlay.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_overlay.c
@@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ static void intel_overlay_off_tail(struct intel_overlay
*overlay)
i830_overlay_clock_gating(dev_priv, true);
}
-static void
+__i915_active_call static void
Am I blind or are we just packing flag bits into a pointer, passing
that to a function, and then immediately unpack the bits again in
said function? Why not just pass the flags explicitly?
Looks like you missed auto_retire()?
Ah, just saw the other patch from Stéphane.
For the series:
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
Thanks Ville, pushed.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
