On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:46:45AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 11-07-16 om 22:27 schreef Gustavo Padovan: > > 2016-07-10 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > >> Op 08-07-16 om 17:44 schreef Gustavo Padovan: > >>> From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Signalling doesn't need to be enabled at sync_file creation, it is only > >>> required if userspace waiting the fence to signal through poll(). > >>> > >>> Thus we delay fence_add_callback() until poll is called. It only adds the > >>> callback the first time poll() is called. This avoid re-adding the same > >>> callback multiple times. > >>> > >>> v2: rebase and update to work with new fence support for sync_file > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> This patch applies on top of my latest sync_file changes to support > >>> fence_array: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/4/534 > >>> > >>> drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c | 23 ++++++++++++++--------- > >>> include/linux/sync_file.h | 2 ++ > >>> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c b/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c > >>> index 61a687c..1db4a64 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c > >>> @@ -86,8 +86,6 @@ struct sync_file *sync_file_create(struct fence *fence) > >>> fence->ops->get_timeline_name(fence), fence->context, > >>> fence->seqno); > >>> > >>> - fence_add_callback(fence, &sync_file->cb, fence_check_cb_func); > >>> - > >>> return sync_file; > >>> } > >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(sync_file_create); > >>> @@ -269,9 +267,6 @@ static struct sync_file *sync_file_merge(const char *name, struct sync_file *a, > >>> goto err; > >>> } > >>> > >>> - fence_add_callback(sync_file->fence, &sync_file->cb, > >>> - fence_check_cb_func); > >>> - > >>> strlcpy(sync_file->name, name, sizeof(sync_file->name)); > >>> return sync_file; > >>> > >>> @@ -286,7 +281,6 @@ static void sync_file_free(struct kref *kref) > >>> struct sync_file *sync_file = container_of(kref, struct sync_file, > >>> kref); > >>> > >>> - fence_remove_callback(sync_file->fence, &sync_file->cb); > >>> fence_put(sync_file->fence); > >>> kfree(sync_file); > >>> } > >>> @@ -306,13 +300,24 @@ static unsigned int sync_file_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait) > >>> > >>> poll_wait(file, &sync_file->wq, wait); > >>> > >>> + if (!sync_file->enabled) { > >>> + fence_add_callback(sync_file->fence, &sync_file->cb, > >>> + fence_check_cb_func); > >>> + sync_file->enabled = true; > >>> + } > >> Won't this blow up completely with 2 threads polling at the same time? > > Indeed, using atomic operations on enabled should fix this. > No, it still would blow up without locking around fence_remove/add_callback too.. > > Personally I would just add the callback once, then remove it in destructor. > > Something like: > > poll: > if (!atomic_xchg(&sync_file->enabled, 1)) { > if (fence_add_callback(...) < 0) > wake up sync_file->wq, fence is signaled > } > > sync_file_free: > if (atomic_read(&sync_file->enabled)) > fence_remove_callback(...); > > fence_put() > > It's not like fence can disable hw signaling when all callbacks are removed anyway, > it's harmless to keep it on the list. +1 from me on this plan, removing the callbacks doesn't provide any value (before the sync_file is destroyed). Also, when someone polls, you can expect to get repolled a lot until the fences finally all signal. -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
