|
On 2018年10月25日 17:23, Koenig, Christian
wrote:
Am 25.10.18 um 11:20 schrieb zhoucm1:
On 2018年10月25日 17:11, Koenig,
Christian wrote:
Am 25.10.18 um 11:03 schrieb
zhoucm1:
On 2018年10月25日 16:56, Christian
König wrote:
+++
b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
@@ -111,15 +111,16 @@ static struct dma_fence
uint64_t point)
{
struct drm_syncobj_signal_pt *signal_pt;
+ struct dma_fence *f = NULL;
+ struct drm_syncobj_stub_fence *fence =
+ kzalloc(sizeof(struct drm_syncobj_stub_fence),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!fence)
+ return NULL;
+ spin_lock(&syncobj->pt_lock);
How about using a single static stub fence like I
suggested?
Sorry, I don't get your meanings, how to do that?
Add a new function drm_syncobj_stub_fence_init() which is
called from drm_core_init() when the module is loaded.
In drm_syncobj_stub_fence_init() you initialize one static
stub_fence which is then used over and over again.
Seems it would not work, we could need more than one stub fence.
Mhm, why? I mean it is just a signaled fence,
If A gets the global stub fence, doesn't put it yet, then B is
coming, how does B re-use the global stub fence? anything I
misunderstand?
David
context
and sequence number are irrelevant.
Christian.
David
Since its reference count never goes down to zero it should
never be freed. In doubt maybe add a .free callback which just
calls BUG() to catch reference count issues.
Christian.
Thanks,
David
|
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
