Claude review: drm/msm/a6xx: Restore sysprof_active

[Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>]

Patch Review

**Correctness: Good.** The `.sysprof_setup` field belongs to `struct msm_gpu_funcs` (defined at `msm_gpu.h:95`), and the assignment is correctly placed inside the `.base = { }` initializer block of both `a6xx_gpu_funcs` and `a7xx_gpu_funcs`. The function `a6xx_gmu_sysprof_setup()` exists in `a6xx_gmu.c:2037` and is declared in `a6xx_gpu.h:274`.

The call site in `msm_submitqueue.c:44-45`:
```c
if (gpu->funcs->sysprof_setup)
    gpu->funcs->sysprof_setup(gpu);
```
null-checks the pointer before calling, so the omission didn't cause a crash — it silently failed to block IFPC, causing perfcounter corruption during profiling.

**Placement within the initializer:** The new line is placed after `.progress` and before the closing `},` of the `.base` block, which is consistent with the existing ordering. Fine.

**Scope question:** The patch correctly skips `a6xx_gmuwrapper_funcs`, since that variant doesn't use the GMU and `a6xx_gmu_sysprof_setup()` accesses `a6xx_gpu->gmu` internals.

However, `a8xx_gpu_funcs` (at `a6xx_gpu.c:2820`) also uses the GMU (`pm_suspend = a6xx_gmu_pm_suspend`, `pm_resume = a6xx_gmu_pm_resume`) and has the same inline OOB handling in `a8xx_hw_init` (`a8xx_gpu.c:852-856`) that a6xx has in its hw_init (`a6xx_gpu.c:1610-1614`). The hw_init code only covers the resume/recovery path — it does not cover the dynamic case where userspace starts profiling while the GPU is already running, which is what `a6xx_gmu_sysprof_setup()` handles. Should `a8xx_gpu_funcs` also get `.sysprof_setup = a6xx_gmu_sysprof_setup`? If a8xx was added after the catalogue refactor, this would be a pre-existing gap rather than a regression, but it seems like the same bug.

**Fixes tag:** Correctly references the commit that caused the regression.

**Minor nit on subject line:** The subject says "Restore sysprof_active" but what's actually being restored is the `.sysprof_setup` vfunc assignment. `sysprof_active` is the refcount that the setup function reads — not the thing being restored. Very minor.

---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer