On 02.05.2012 06:04, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 12:00 AM,<j.glisse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ok so i reread stuff and the :
drm/radeon: add general purpose fence signaled callback
is a big NAK actually. It change the paradigm. Moving most of
the handling into the irq process which is something i am intimatly
convinced we should avoid.
Here is the patchset up to ib pool cleanup. I have yet rebase the
other patches as i am tracking done some issue in the sa allocation.
Cheers,
Jerome
Before i forget, the big issue with doing work from irq handler is that
we never know in middle of what other part can be. I believe it's lot
better to have irq process only update fence (signaled/not signaled).
and have the actual work happening on behalf of the process wether
through sa alloc path or ttm path.
Disagree.
Why should it be better to delay work outside of the interrupt context
if proper locking can make the driver much more responsive and easier to
implement?
I don't want to call into TTM or stuff like that, just want make it
possible to release the resources acquired for a job immediately after
the job is completed instead of waiting for the next allocation to
happen. Cause then you don't need to check if a bunch of fences might
possible be signaled and instead just get a proper signal that resources
can be deallocated.
Also if you really want to keep the irq context out of the drivers upper
layers, it should be quite easy to modify the code so that the callback
won't happen from there.
Christian.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
