On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:33 AM, Christian König > <deathsimple@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Only increase the higher 32bits if we really detect a wrap around. >> >> v2: instead of increasing the higher 32bits just use the higher >> 32bits from the last emitted fence. >> v3: also use last emitted fence value as upper limit. >> >> The intention of this patch is to make fences as robust as >> they where before introducing 64bit fences. This is >> necessary because on older systems it looks like the fence >> value gets corrupted on initialization. >> >> Should fix: >> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54129 >> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51344 >> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54662 >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=846505 >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845639 >> >> Needs to be adopted for 3.5, but that shouldn't be to >> much of a problem. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christian König <deathsimple@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > This looks good to me. I made a few minor changes to the commit > message to note that 3.5.x requires a different patch which will be > sent out separately due to changes in the fence code. If there are no > objections I'll send this out in my next -fixes pull request later > today. Yeah looks good here too Cheers, Jerome > > Alex > >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c | 8 +++++--- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c >> index 7b737b9..2a59375 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c >> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ int radeon_fence_emit(struct radeon_device *rdev, >> */ >> void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) >> { >> - uint64_t seq, last_seq; >> + uint64_t seq, last_seq, last_emitted; >> unsigned count_loop = 0; >> bool wake = false; >> >> @@ -158,13 +158,15 @@ void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) >> */ >> last_seq = atomic64_read(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq); >> do { >> + last_emitted = rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]; >> seq = radeon_fence_read(rdev, ring); >> seq |= last_seq & 0xffffffff00000000LL; >> if (seq < last_seq) { >> - seq += 0x100000000LL; >> + seq &= 0xffffffff; >> + seq |= last_emitted & 0xffffffff00000000LL; >> } >> >> - if (seq == last_seq) { >> + if (seq <= last_seq || seq > last_emitted) { >> break; >> } >> /* If we loop over we don't want to return without >> -- >> 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
