On 6/16/21 1:00 PM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
Op 15-06-2021 om 15:14 schreef Thomas Hellström:
Introduce a for_i915_gem_ww(){} utility to help make the code
around a ww transaction more readable.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_ww.h | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_ww.h
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_ww.h
index f2d8769e4118..f6b1a796667b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_ww.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_ww.h
@@ -11,11 +11,40 @@ struct i915_gem_ww_ctx {
struct ww_acquire_ctx ctx;
struct list_head obj_list;
struct drm_i915_gem_object *contended;
- bool intr;
+ unsigned short intr;
+ unsigned short loop;
};
void i915_gem_ww_ctx_init(struct i915_gem_ww_ctx *ctx, bool intr);
void i915_gem_ww_ctx_fini(struct i915_gem_ww_ctx *ctx);
int __must_check i915_gem_ww_ctx_backoff(struct i915_gem_ww_ctx *ctx);
void i915_gem_ww_unlock_single(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj);
+
+/* Internal functions used by the inlines! Don't use. */
+static inline int __i915_gem_ww_fini(struct i915_gem_ww_ctx *ww, int err)
+{
+ ww->loop = 0;
+ if (err == -EDEADLK) {
+ err = i915_gem_ww_ctx_backoff(ww);
+ if (!err)
+ ww->loop = 1;
+ }
+
+ if (!ww->loop)
+ i915_gem_ww_ctx_fini(ww);
+
+ return err;
+}
+
+static inline void
+__i915_gem_ww_init(struct i915_gem_ww_ctx *ww, bool intr)
+{
+ i915_gem_ww_ctx_init(ww, intr);
+ ww->loop = 1;
+}
+
+#define for_i915_gem_ww(_ww, _err, _intr) \
+ for (__i915_gem_ww_init(_ww, _intr); (_ww)->loop; \
+ _err = __i915_gem_ww_fini(_ww, _err))
+
#endif
With some more macro abuse, we should be able to kill off ww->loop,
Killing off ww->loop in itself is a good thing, I think. But the below
is a bit hard to follow, I think, :/
for (err = ({i915_gem_ww_ctx_init(ww, intr), -EDEADLK}); err == -EDEADLK; err = (err ==
-EDEADLK && !(err = i915_gem_ww_ctx_backoff(ww))) ? -EDEADLK : err)
Could we simply keep the inlines and use err=-EDEADLK as the loop
condition instead?
/Thomas
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
