Hey Emil,
On 2018-10-31 10:38, Emil Velikov wrote:
Hi Rob,
On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 19:38, Robert Foss <robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Refactor fence creation to remove the potential allocation failure from
the cmd_submit and atomic_commit paths. Now the fence should be allocated
first and just after we should proceed with the rest of the execution.
Commit does a bit more that what the above says:
- dummy, factor out fence creation/destruction
- use per virtio_gpu_framebuffer fence
Personally I'd keep the two separate patches and elaborate on the latter.
Obviously in that case, one will need to add 3 lines worth of
virtio_gpu_fence_alloc() in virtio_gpu_cursor_plane_update which will be nuked
with the next patch.
Not a big deal, but it's up-to the maintainer to make the final call if it's
worth splitting or not.
Agreed, I'll hold off with this change until then.
Couple of minor nitpicks below.
struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev = dev->dev_private;
struct virtio_gpu_output *output = NULL;
struct virtio_gpu_framebuffer *vgfb;
- struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence = NULL;
struct virtio_gpu_object *bo = NULL;
uint32_t handle;
int ret = 0;
Add the virtio_gpu_fence_alloc()? And yes it will be nuked with patch 2/...
+struct virtio_gpu_fence *virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev)
+{
+ struct virtio_gpu_fence_driver *drv = &vgdev->fence_drv;
+ struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence = kzalloc(sizeof(struct virtio_gpu_fence), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ if (!fence)
+ return fence;
+
+ fence->drv = drv;
+ dma_fence_init(&fence->f, &virtio_fence_ops, &drv->lock, drv->context, 0);
Oh no, lines over 80 col... while the original code is pretty and neat.
Ack
+
+ return fence;
+}
+
+void virtio_gpu_fence_cleanup(struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence)
+{
+ if (!fence)
+ return;
+
+ if (fence->drv)
+ dma_fence_put(&fence->f);
+ else
+ kfree(fence);
I'm not sure if/how we reach the else case here?
That case should never be hit, and if it is that's a bug.
Fixed in v4.
+}
+
int virtio_gpu_fence_emit(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev,
struct virtio_gpu_ctrl_hdr *cmd_hdr,
- struct virtio_gpu_fence **fence)
+ struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence)
{
With a follow-up commit, we can drop the no longer needed return type.
Which it turns out was never checked ...
Fixed during drm-misc-next rebase for v4.
@@ -319,6 +332,8 @@ static int virtio_gpu_resource_create_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
dma_fence_put(&fence->f);
}
return 0;
+fail_fence:
The error labels seems to be called after what they do, not what
fails. fail_backoff seems better IMHO.
Agreed. Fixed in v4.
+ttm_eu_backoff_reservation(&ticket, &validate_list);
Indentation seems off (or my client ate it)?
No, the indentation is bad here. Fixed in v4.
Thanks for the feedback Emil.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
