On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:58:41PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > Am 23.05.2016 um 15:50 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > >On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 01:25:22PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > >>From: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> > >> > >>If @signal_on_any is true the fence array signals if any fence in the array > >>signals, otherwise it signals when all fences in the array signal. > >What do you need this for? Sounds neat, but I can't come up with a use > >case. And that use case imo should be both in the commit message and > >kerneldoc. > > Good point, going to fix this when if we really use the patch. Just wanted > to get opinions on this. For getting opinions on this I get a bit the impression we're slightly talking past each another. Having the actual user of these functions handy should help a lot for this discussion. > I'm currently working on making some of the resource management in amdgpu > more friendly to our GPU scheduler. > > Waiting for resources in the GPU scheduler is implemented as waiting for a > fence to fire. So when you want to wait for any resource to become available > (like in our case the VMIDs) you could make good use of something like this. Hm, ok, if you want a fence that fires when any resource becomes available of a given type becomes available that might be useful. But how do you handle the next work item that needs such a resource? Add _all_ previous fences that use it (there's not much ordering with the scheduler) and let them race, and retry if they fail? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel