Am 13.11.2017 um 03:53 schrieb Chunming Zhou:
> Otherwise, they could be optimized by scheduled fence.
>
> Change-Id: I6857eee20aebeaad793d9fe4e1b5222f1be7470e
> Signed-off-by: Chunming Zhou <david1.zhou at amd.com>
First of all patch is Reviewed-by: Christian König
<christian.koenig at amd.com>.
Second do you remember why we did this? I have some brief memory in my
head that a certain CTS test failed because we didn't completely
synchronized between dependencies explicit added by a semaphore.
Then can we narrow this down into a unit test for libdrm? Probably not
so easy to reproduce otherwise.
Thanks,
Christian.
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c
> index 673fb9f4301e..4a2af571d35f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c
> @@ -1078,7 +1078,7 @@ static int amdgpu_cs_process_fence_dep(struct amdgpu_cs_parser *p,
> amdgpu_ctx_put(ctx);
> return r;
> } else if (fence) {
> - r = amdgpu_sync_fence(p->adev, &p->job->sync,
> + r = amdgpu_sync_fence(p->adev, &p->job->dep_sync,
> fence);
> dma_fence_put(fence);
> amdgpu_ctx_put(ctx);
> @@ -1103,7 +1103,7 @@ static int amdgpu_syncobj_lookup_and_add_to_sync(struct amdgpu_cs_parser *p,
> if (r)
> return r;
>
> - r = amdgpu_sync_fence(p->adev, &p->job->sync, fence);
> + r = amdgpu_sync_fence(p->adev, &p->job->dep_sync, fence);
> dma_fence_put(fence);
>
> return r;
