Am 10.04.2017 um 12:16 schrieb Liu, Monk: > Is that so ? > > Seq is already type of "uint64_t", GCC still compiles ~0 as 0xffffffff, but not 0xffffffffffffffff ? You mean that it sign extend the value? Good point, that could be as well. > I'll change to use ~0ull anyway, Yeah, that should make it a bit more clear what happens here. Christian. > > BR Monk > > > -----é?®ä»¶å??件----- > å??件人: Christian König [mailto:deathsimple at vodafone.de] > å??é??æ?¶é?´: Monday, April 10, 2017 4:10 PM > æ?¶ä»¶äºº: Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > 主é¢?: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu:fix race condition > > Am 10.04.2017 um 09:39 schrieb Monk Liu: >> sequence is protected by spinlock so don't access sequence in paramter >> seq when invoking this function. >> >> ~0 means to get the latest sequence number and 0 means none to get. > Well you are still not using ~0ull as I said. Using ~0 here will cause 0xffffffff to be used instead of 0xffffffffffffffff. > > Additional to that please add a define into amdgpu_drm.h to document this interface change. > > Christian. > >> Change-Id: Ib7a03f3cf5594deeb4ad333cc59b47a6bddfd1ad >> Signed-off-by: Monk Liu <Monk.Liu at amd.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ctx.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ctx.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ctx.c >> index 6d86eae..c24bb90 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ctx.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ctx.c >> @@ -277,6 +277,9 @@ struct fence *amdgpu_ctx_get_fence(struct >> amdgpu_ctx *ctx, >> >> spin_lock(&ctx->ring_lock); >> >> + if (seq == ~0) >> + seq = ctx->rings[ring->idx].sequence - 1; >> + >> if (seq >= cring->sequence) { >> spin_unlock(&ctx->ring_lock); >> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > > _______________________________________________ > amd-gfx mailing list > amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
