Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-13 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday, December 12, 2015 07:49:56 PM Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 09:40:45PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > > On Sat, 2015-12-12 at 02:51 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > +bool pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(struct device *dev) > > > +{ > > > + unsigned long flags; > > > + bool ret

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-12 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 09:40:45PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > On Sat, 2015-12-12 at 02:51 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > +bool pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(struct device *dev) > > +{ > > + unsigned long flags; > > + bool retval; > > + > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->power.lock, flags); > > +

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-12 Thread Imre Deak
On Sat, 2015-12-12 at 02:51 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Saturday, December 12, 2015 12:41:06 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Saturday, December 12, 2015 12:21:43 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Friday, December 11, 2015 05:47:08 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > > > On pe, 2015-12-11 at 16:4

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday, December 12, 2015 12:41:06 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Saturday, December 12, 2015 12:21:43 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday, December 11, 2015 05:47:08 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > > On pe, 2015-12-11 at 16:40 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Friday, December 11, 20

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday, December 12, 2015 12:21:43 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, December 11, 2015 05:47:08 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > On pe, 2015-12-11 at 16:40 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Friday, December 11, 2015 02:54:45 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > > > On to, 2015-12-10 at 23:14 +0100, Ra

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Friday, December 11, 2015 04:59:45 PM Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 11 December 2015 at 16:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday, December 11, 2015 01:03:50 PM Ulf Hansson wrote: > >> [...] > >> > >> >> > > >> >> > Which basically means you can call pm_runtime_resume() just fine, > >> >> > becau

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Friday, December 11, 2015 05:47:08 PM Imre Deak wrote: > On pe, 2015-12-11 at 16:40 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday, December 11, 2015 02:54:45 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > > On to, 2015-12-10 at 23:14 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:20:40 PM Im

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Ulf Hansson
[...] >> > >> > Which basically means you can call pm_runtime_resume() just fine, >> > because it will do nothing if the status is RPM_ACTIVE already. >> > >> > So really, why don't you use pm_runtime_get_sync()? >> >> The difference would be that if the status is not RPM_ACTIVE already we >> woul

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Ulf Hansson
On 11 December 2015 at 16:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, December 11, 2015 01:03:50 PM Ulf Hansson wrote: >> [...] >> >> >> > >> >> > Which basically means you can call pm_runtime_resume() just fine, >> >> > because it will do nothing if the status is RPM_ACTIVE already. >> >> > >> >> >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Imre Deak
On pe, 2015-12-11 at 16:40 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, December 11, 2015 02:54:45 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > On to, 2015-12-10 at 23:14 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:20:40 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 22:42 +0100, Rafael J

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Friday, December 11, 2015 02:54:45 PM Imre Deak wrote: > On to, 2015-12-10 at 23:14 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:20:40 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 22:42 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 10:36:37 PM

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Friday, December 11, 2015 01:03:50 PM Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] > > >> > > >> > Which basically means you can call pm_runtime_resume() just fine, > >> > because it will do nothing if the status is RPM_ACTIVE already. > >> > > >> > So really, why don't you use pm_runtime_get_sync()? > >> > >> T

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Imre Deak
On to, 2015-12-10 at 23:14 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:20:40 PM Imre Deak wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 22:42 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 10:36:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki > > > wrote: > > > > On Thursday, December 10,

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-11 Thread Dave Gordon
On 10/12/15 22:14, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:20:40 PM Imre Deak wrote: On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 22:42 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Thursday, December 10, 2015 10:36:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:43:50 AM Imre Deak wrote: O

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-10 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:20:40 PM Imre Deak wrote: > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 22:42 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 10:36:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:43:50 AM Imre Deak wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 01:58 +01

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-10 Thread Imre Deak
On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 22:42 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 10:36:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:43:50 AM Imre Deak wrote: > > > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 01:58 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, December 09, 2015

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-10 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 10:36:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:43:50 AM Imre Deak wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 01:58 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Wednesday, December 09, 2015 06:22:19 PM Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > > > > Introduce pm_runtime_get

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-10 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:43:50 AM Imre Deak wrote: > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 01:58 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wednesday, December 09, 2015 06:22:19 PM Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > > > Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle to for situations where it is not > > > desireable to touch an idlin

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-10 Thread Imre Deak
On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 01:58 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, December 09, 2015 06:22:19 PM Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > > Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle to for situations where it is not > > desireable to touch an idling device. One use scenario is periodic > > hangchecks performed by t

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-09 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Wednesday, December 09, 2015 06:22:19 PM Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle to for situations where it is not > desireable to touch an idling device. One use scenario is periodic > hangchecks performed by the drm/i915 driver which can be omitted > on a device in a runtime i

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] PM / Runtime: Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle

2015-12-09 Thread Joonas Lahtinen
Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle to for situations where it is not desireable to touch an idling device. One use scenario is periodic hangchecks performed by the drm/i915 driver which can be omitted on a device in a runtime idle state. v2: - Fix inconsistent return value when !CONFIG_PM. - Update d