Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Don't disable interrupts and pretend a lock as been acquired in __timeline_mark_lock().

On 18/11/2021 16:59, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: This is a revert of commits d67739268cf0e ("drm/i915/gt: Mark up the nested engine-pm timeline lock as irqsafe") 6c69a45445af9 ("drm/i915/gt: Mark context->active_count as protected by timeline->mutex") 6dcb85a0ad99 ("drm/i915: H

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Don't disable interrupts and pretend a lock as been acquired in __timeline_mark_lock().

On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 05:33:09PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2021-11-19 17:04:00 [+0100], Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Yeah if we can simplify this with reverts then I'm all for this. > > > > Acked-by: Daniel Vetter > > > > I've asked drm/i915 maintainers to check&merge. > > Than

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Don't disable interrupts and pretend a lock as been acquired in __timeline_mark_lock().

On 2021-11-19 17:04:00 [+0100], Daniel Vetter wrote: > Yeah if we can simplify this with reverts then I'm all for this. > > Acked-by: Daniel Vetter > > I've asked drm/i915 maintainers to check&merge. Thanks. Should I repost my queue (excluding this one) or should wait until this one has been ta

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Don't disable interrupts and pretend a lock as been acquired in __timeline_mark_lock().

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 05:59:14PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > This is a revert of commits >d67739268cf0e ("drm/i915/gt: Mark up the nested engine-pm timeline lock as > irqsafe") >6c69a45445af9 ("drm/i915/gt: Mark context->active_count as protected by > timeline->mutex") >

[PATCH] drm/i915: Don't disable interrupts and pretend a lock as been acquired in __timeline_mark_lock().

This is a revert of commits d67739268cf0e ("drm/i915/gt: Mark up the nested engine-pm timeline lock as irqsafe") 6c69a45445af9 ("drm/i915/gt: Mark context->active_count as protected by timeline->mutex") The existing code leads to a different behaviour depending on whether lockdep is enable