On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > But like I've said fence->signaled is optional so you don't need this > necessarily, as long as radeon eventually calls fence_signaled once > the fence has completed. Actually I've chatted a bit with Maarten about the different ways we could restrict both the calling context and the implementations for fence callbacks to avoid surprises. One is certainyl that we need WARN_ON(in_interrupt) around the wait, enable_singaling and add callback stuff. But we also talked about ensure that the ->signaled callback never sleeps by wrapping it in a preempt_enable/disable section. Currently sleeping is allowed in ->signaled, which the radeon implementation here does. I think it would be reasonable to forbid this and drop __radeon_fence_signaled. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
