On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:32:42PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:15:00PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > If the GEM objects being rendered with in this request have been > > exported via dma-buf to a third party, hook ourselves into the dma-buf > > reservation object so that the third party can serialise with our > > rendering via the dma-buf fences. > > > > Testcase: igt/prime_busy > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Style nit: I prefer ww_mutex_lock(&resv->lock, NULL); over > mutex_lock(&resv->lock.base). The former makes it clear it's a ww mutex, > but we don't bother with the multi-lock dance. The latter needles around > in implemenation details, which it really shouldn't. Please change. Passing NULL as ww_acquite_ctx is illegal. > The other wonky bit is that changing reservations on multiple objects > without the full ww mutex dance is deadlock-risky. But only when you both > add and wait/stall on fences. Note that it is only so when trying to lock multiple objects simultaneously, which we do not require. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
