On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 06:08:25PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> One of the few guarantees we want the busy ioctl to provide is that the
> reported busy writer is included in the set of busy read engines. This
> should be provided by the ordering of setting and retiring the active
> trackers, but we can do better by explicitly setting the busy read
> engine flag for the last writer.
>
> v2: More comments inside __busy_write_id() to explain why both fields
> are set.
>
> Fixes: 3fdc13c7a3cb ("drm/i915: Remove (struct_mutex) locking for busy-ioctl")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>From irc, Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
