RE: [PATCH] reservation: wait only with non-zero timeout specified (v3)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>> I think it would be best to leave timeout=0 returning 0. Not handling it differently gives the same semantics as used by fence_wait_time and wait_event_timeout.
>> Are there really many cases in which you don't know if timeout = 0 before or not?

>Yeah I think with this it's more important to be consistent with all the other wait_something primitives the kernel exposes.

Okay. I think we can live with that from driver perspective by handling timeout==0 and timeout>0 differently. 
But it should still be worth adding some notes for reservation_object_wait_timeout_rcu that  the return value cannot be used to judge if the fences are signaled or not when timeout==0.

Regards,
Jammy
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux