Re: [PATCH 01/16] drm/i915: Introduce i915_gem_active_wait_unlocked()

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

 



On ke, 2016-08-03 at 14:43 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 04:30:35PM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > 
> > On ke, 2016-08-03 at 13:04 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 12:56:39PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > static inline struct drm_i915_gem_request *
> > > > i915_gem_active_get_rcu(const struct i915_gem_active *active)
> > > Alternative name would be i915_gem_active_get_unlocked()
> > > (Starting to get too unwieldy.)
> > It's less confusing.
> > 
> > I assume you intend to extend the rcu_read_lock() section?
> Yes, I had intended to. At the moment, the other caller has been removed
> because I need the struct_mutex as an execbuf-barrier so as of now there
> was no value to using RCU there and reverted to simple form.
> 
> I still think it is more flexible to allow the caller to control the
> locking.

Yes, if there's something else to do too. But it's not a biggie with
the function renamed;

Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> -Chris
> 
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux