On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org> wrote: >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c >> index 9eb303c1b621..76bc4d0de5a4 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c >> @@ -589,6 +589,7 @@ __i915_enable_pipestat(struct drm_i915_private >> *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe, >> u32 pipestat = I915_READ(reg) & PIPESTAT_INT_ENABLE_MASK; >> >> assert_spin_locked(&dev_priv->irq_lock); >> + WARN_ON(!intel_irqs_enabled(dev_priv)); >> >> if (WARN_ONCE(enable_mask & ~PIPESTAT_INT_ENABLE_MASK || >> status_mask & ~PIPESTAT_INT_STATUS_MASK, >> @@ -615,6 +616,7 @@ __i915_disable_pipestat(struct drm_i915_private >> *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe, >> u32 pipestat = I915_READ(reg) & PIPESTAT_INT_ENABLE_MASK; >> >> assert_spin_locked(&dev_priv->irq_lock); >> + WARN_ON(!intel_irqs_enabled(dev_priv)); >> >> if (WARN_ONCE(enable_mask & ~PIPESTAT_INT_ENABLE_MASK || >> status_mask & ~PIPESTAT_INT_STATUS_MASK, > > Yeah looks good, wonder if it'll trigger any new warnings.
It will blow up in a bunch of postinstall hooks, just like the one for ilk. At least without my patch to shuffle the pm._irqs_disabled assignment around. > Reviewed-by: Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org> ... so does that count as an implicit r-b on my other patch? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
