Am 19.08.2013 12:17, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst:
[SNIP]
@@ -190,25 +225,24 @@ void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
}
} while (atomic64_xchg(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq, seq) > seq);
- if (wake) {
+ if (wake)
rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_activity = jiffies;
- wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue);
- }
+ return wake;
}
Very bad idea, when sequence numbers change, you always want to wake up
the whole fence queue here.
[SNIP]
+/**
+ * radeon_fence_enable_signaling - enable signalling on fence
+ * @fence: fence
+ *
+ * This function is called with fence_queue lock held, and adds a callback
+ * to fence_queue that checks if this fence is signaled, and if so it
+ * signals the fence and removes itself.
+ */
+static bool radeon_fence_enable_signaling(struct fence *f)
+{
+ struct radeon_fence *fence = to_radeon_fence(f);
+
+ if (atomic64_read(&fence->rdev->fence_drv[fence->ring].last_seq) >= fence->seq ||
+ !fence->rdev->ddev->irq_enabled)
+ return false;
+
Do I get that right that you rely on IRQs to be enabled and working
here? Cause that would be a quite bad idea from the conceptual side.
+ radeon_irq_kms_sw_irq_get(fence->rdev, fence->ring);
+
+ if (__radeon_fence_process(fence->rdev, fence->ring))
+ wake_up_all_locked(&fence->rdev->fence_queue);
+
+ /* did fence get signaled after we enabled the sw irq? */
+ if (atomic64_read(&fence->rdev->fence_drv[fence->ring].last_seq) >= fence->seq) {
+ radeon_irq_kms_sw_irq_put(fence->rdev, fence->ring);
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ fence->fence_wake.flags = 0;
+ fence->fence_wake.private = NULL;
+ fence->fence_wake.func = radeon_fence_check_signaled;
+ __add_wait_queue(&fence->rdev->fence_queue, &fence->fence_wake);
+ fence_get(f);
+
+ return true;
+}
+
/**
* radeon_fence_signaled - check if a fence has signaled
*
Christian.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
