On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 04:20:39PM +0800, Chunming Zhou wrote:
> It is normal that binary syncobj replaces the underlying fence.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chunming Zhou <david1.zhou@xxxxxxx>
Do we hit this with one of the syncobj igts?
-Daniel
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 3 ---
> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> index 929f7c64f9a2..bc7ec1679e4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> @@ -151,9 +151,6 @@ void drm_syncobj_add_point(struct drm_syncobj *syncobj,
> spin_lock(&syncobj->lock);
>
> prev = drm_syncobj_fence_get(syncobj);
> - /* You are adding an unorder point to timeline, which could cause payload returned from query_ioctl is 0! */
> - if (prev && prev->seqno >= point)
> - DRM_ERROR("You are adding an unorder point to timeline!\n");
> dma_fence_chain_init(chain, prev, fence, point);
> rcu_assign_pointer(syncobj->fence, &chain->base);
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
--
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
