Hi Emil. On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 04:07:50PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: > From: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > There's little point in providing partial and ancient information about > the struct_mutex. Some drivers are using it, new ones should not. > > As-it this only provides for confusion. > > Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/gpu/drm-mm.rst | 7 ++----- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/drm-mm.rst b/Documentation/gpu/drm-mm.rst > index 1839762044be..5ba2ead8f317 100644 > --- a/Documentation/gpu/drm-mm.rst > +++ b/Documentation/gpu/drm-mm.rst > @@ -178,11 +178,8 @@ GEM Objects Lifetime > -------------------- > > All GEM objects are reference-counted by the GEM core. References can be > -acquired and release by calling drm_gem_object_get() and drm_gem_object_put() > -respectively. The caller must hold the :c:type:`struct drm_device <drm_device>` > -struct_mutex lock when calling drm_gem_object_get(). As a convenience, GEM > -provides drm_gem_object_put_unlocked() functions that can be called without > -holding the lock. > +acquired and release by calling drm_gem_object_get() and drm_gem_object_put_unlocked() > +respectively. Nice to get rid of struct_mutex lock stuff. But no need to s/drm_gem_object_put/drm_gem_object_put_unlocked()/ as this will be renamed a bit later. Sam > > When the last reference to a GEM object is released the GEM core calls > the :c:type:`struct drm_driver <drm_driver>` gem_free_object_unlocked > -- > 2.25.1 > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
