On 01.09.2026 15:08, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 21:56:48 +0100 > Adrián Larumbe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Because MMU interrupts are only enabled when the device is reset, it > > happened that after DRM device registration, the very first job targeting > > the tiler heap BO would always time out. The reason is the reset sequence > > is only part of PM runtime resume, which is not called explicitly at driver > > probe time, and an actual reset work item manually triggered after a HW > > error. > > > > I have attempted a somewhat drastic solution, which is completely > > decoupling GPU/MMU/JM subsystem initialisation and reset from interrupt > > enablement, so that we can handle IRQ toggling a bit more flexibly. > > > > To this end: > > - Ensure every subsystem with its own IRQ has an 'enable interrupts' > > method, and that it doesn't enable them anywhere else. > > - Force IRQ masking at MMU reset time. Up until, now, panfrost_mmu_reset() > > was clearing the MMU IRQ suspension bit, but at no point that is set during > > the reset sequence. > > > > Then manually enable all interrupts when the device is fully initialised at > > probe time, right before DRM device registration, or after the reset > > sequence is complete. Also disable all interrupts at device remove time, > > so that their IRQs can be sync'ed right before tearing the device down. > > > > Fixes: 635430797d3f ("drm/panfrost: Rework runtime PM initialization") > > Fixes: 876b15d2c88d ("drm/panfrost: Fix module unload") > > Signed-off-by: Adrián Larumbe <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_device.c | 40 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_device.h | 3 ++- > > drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_gpu.c | 19 ++++++++------ > > drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_gpu.h | 2 ++ > > drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_job.c | 7 +++--- > > drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c | 9 +++++-- > > drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.h | 2 ++ > > 7 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_device.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_device.c > > index 9e02fb5f73c8..99f7da2180f9 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_device.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_device.c > > @@ -226,6 +226,27 @@ static int panfrost_pm_domain_init(struct > > panfrost_device *pfdev) > > return err; > > } > > > > +void panfrost_device_enable_int(struct panfrost_device *pfdev) > > +{ > > + panfrost_gpu_enable_interrupts(pfdev); > > + panfrost_mmu_enable_interrupts(pfdev); > > + panfrost_jm_enable_interrupts(pfdev); > > +} > > + > > +static void panfrost_device_enable_hw(struct panfrost_device *pfdev) > > +{ > > + panfrost_device_enable_int(pfdev); > > + panfrost_devfreq_resume(pfdev); > > +} > > + > > +static void panfrost_device_disable_hw(struct panfrost_device *pfdev) > > +{ > > + panfrost_devfreq_suspend(pfdev); > > + panfrost_jm_suspend_irq(pfdev); > > + panfrost_mmu_suspend_irq(pfdev); > > + panfrost_gpu_suspend_irq(pfdev); > > Hm, I think I'd prefer if those suspend/resume_irq() were hidden in > some subcomponent panfrost_<subcomp>_suspend,resume() helpers. And > then we just have to resume/suspend component in the right order > instead of treating IRQs as a standalone object (enabling/disabling > only makes sense if the subcomponent handling those interrupts is > resumed/suspended).
I thought it would only make sense to enable interupts for a given subsystem when all the other subsystems are also resumed or initialised. This was prompted by Sashiko warning of the possibility of spurious interrupts causing a handler to be run when one of the subsystems it touches on hasn't yet been initialised. Adrian Larumbe
