On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 09:43:21AM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> On ma, 2016-11-07 at 13:59 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > @@ -56,6 +61,24 @@ int i915_gem_timeline_init(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +int i915_gem_timeline_init(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> > + struct i915_gem_timeline *timeline,
> > + const char *name)
> > +{
> > + static struct lock_class_key class;
> > + return __i915_gem_timeline_init(i915, timeline, name,
> > + &class, "timeline");
> > +}
> > +
> > +int i915_gem_timeline_init__global(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> > +{
> > + static struct lock_class_key class;
> > + return __i915_gem_timeline_init(i915,
> > + &i915->gt.global_timeline,
> > + "[execution]",
> > + &class, "global-timeline");
> > +}
> > +
>
> These names might have potential to be confusing in lockdep splat,
> don't you think?
Urm, I lost a fixup. They are meant to be &timeline->lock and
&global_timeline->lock.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
