From 48f522db19d10bf931d52a112434495e54fc9912 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jack Xiao Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 16:40:48 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 2339/2940] drm/amdgpu/gfx10: remove unnecessary waiting on gfx inactive The following KIQ ring test could guarantee the previous unmap has been done. Signed-off-by: Jack Xiao Reviewed-by: Hawking Zhang Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 35 ++++---------------------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c index 262c4004939f..fc6b95fe6879 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c @@ -3564,9 +3564,8 @@ static int gfx_v10_0_hw_init(void *handle) static int gfx_v10_0_kiq_disable_kgq(struct amdgpu_device *adev) { struct amdgpu_kiq *kiq = &adev->gfx.kiq; - struct amdgpu_ring *ring, *kiq_ring = &kiq->ring; - struct v10_gfx_mqd *mqd; - int r, i, j; + struct amdgpu_ring *kiq_ring = &kiq->ring; + int i; if (!kiq->pmf || !kiq->pmf->kiq_unmap_queues) return -EINVAL; @@ -3575,33 +3574,9 @@ static int gfx_v10_0_kiq_disable_kgq(struct amdgpu_device *adev) adev->gfx.num_gfx_rings)) return -ENOMEM; - for (i = 0; i < adev->gfx.num_gfx_rings; i++) { - ring = &adev->gfx.gfx_ring[i]; - - r = amdgpu_bo_reserve(ring->mqd_obj, false); - if (unlikely(r != 0)) - return r; - - r = amdgpu_bo_kmap(ring->mqd_obj, (void **)&ring->mqd_ptr); - if (!r) { - kiq->pmf->kiq_unmap_queues(kiq_ring, ring, - PREEMPT_QUEUES, 0, 0); - mqd = ring->mqd_ptr; - - for (j = 0; j < adev->usec_timeout; j++) { - if (!mqd->cp_gfx_hqd_active) - break; - udelay(1); - } - - if (j == adev->usec_timeout) - DRM_ERROR("failed to wait for gfx inactive\n"); - - amdgpu_bo_kunmap(ring->mqd_obj); - ring->mqd_ptr = NULL; - } - amdgpu_bo_unreserve(ring->mqd_obj); - } + for (i = 0; i < adev->gfx.num_gfx_rings; i++) + kiq->pmf->kiq_unmap_queues(kiq_ring, &adev->gfx.gfx_ring[i], + PREEMPT_QUEUES, 0, 0); return amdgpu_ring_test_ring(kiq_ring); } -- 2.17.1