On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Christian König <deathsimple@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Instead of returning the error handle it directly
>> and while at it fix the comments about the ring lock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <deathsimple@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer@xxxxxxx>
>
> For the series:
>
> Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h | 2 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++------------
>> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h
>> index 77b4519b..5861ec8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h
>> @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring);
>> bool radeon_fence_signaled(struct radeon_fence *fence);
>> int radeon_fence_wait(struct radeon_fence *fence, bool interruptible);
>> int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring);
>> -int radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring);
>> +void radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring);
>> int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev,
>> struct radeon_fence **fences,
>> bool intr);
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
>> index 7b55625..be4e4f3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
>> @@ -440,14 +440,11 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +/* caller must hold ring lock */
>> int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
>> {
>> uint64_t seq;
>>
>> - /* We are not protected by ring lock when reading current seq but
>> - * it's ok as worst case is we return to early while we could have
>> - * wait.
>> - */
>> seq = atomic64_read(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq) + 1ULL;
>> if (seq >= rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]) {
>> /* nothing to wait for, last_seq is
>> @@ -457,15 +454,27 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
>> return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, ring, false, false);
>> }
>>
>> -int radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
>> +/* caller must hold ring lock */
>> +void radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
>> {
>> - /* We are not protected by ring lock when reading current seq
>> - * but it's ok as wait empty is call from place where no more
>> - * activity can be scheduled so there won't be concurrent access
>> - * to seq value.
>> - */
>> - return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring],
>> - ring, false, false);
>> + uint64_t seq = rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring];
>> +
>> + while(1) {
>> + int r;
>> + r = radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, ring, false, false);
>> + if (r == -EDEADLK) {
>> + mutex_unlock(&rdev->ring_lock);
>> + r = radeon_gpu_reset(rdev);
>> + mutex_lock(&rdev->ring_lock);
>> + if (!r)
>> + continue;
>> + }
>> + if (r) {
>> + dev_err(rdev->dev, "error waiting for ring to become"
>> + " idle (%d)\n", r);
>> + }
>> + return;
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> struct radeon_fence *radeon_fence_ref(struct radeon_fence *fence)
>> --
>> 1.7.9.5
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dri-devel mailing list
>> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
